Download >>> https://byltly.com/281t1x
No one can be blamed for not knowing that the English monarch was usually the head of the Church of England. But it is still worth asking, "How should we think about James’s argument in A Dictator Pope?" Since taking office in October 2013, Pope Francis has made clear he does not share his predecessor’s views on how to govern the Church. He is interested in hearing all views and working collaboratively across borders to combat poverty and human trafficking, for instance. Although James accepts Francis has brought a new energy into an institution that badly needed reform, he argues that by failing to share Benedict’s theological sense of mission, Francis may have inadvertently compromised Catholic identity. "It is possible that Leo XIII and Pius XII were right when they said the Church’s mission at this time [in the 20th century] was to be a missionary Church," says James. "And in my view, they were right because it is in the nature of a missionary Church to go out and preach to others." James’s article begins by looking at two episodes in Pope Benedict’s pontificate: his decision to resign and Francis's election. The upshot: "What we learned from Pope Benedict XVI can help us understand whether Pope Francis is merely a diplomatic figurehead, or whether he believes that the mission of the Church really does require him to go down into the arena. " James asks whether Francis’s decision to forgo the security of his office to live in a small apartment in Rome is really an act of humility, when it could just as easily be interpreted as its opposite. Is it truly courageous for a man who is already 78 and who has an advanced case of Parkinson’s disease to take on the role of pope? James thinks not. "A new culture has taken hold of the Church," James says, "And the old theology of mission seems not only outdated but also downright embarrassing." But Benedict did more than commit blunders during his papacy; he was also remarkably successful at mobilizing conservatives and building up the institutional Catholic Church. And his tenure did not end in failure. James sums up by arguing that "Pope Francis is an entirely different kind of pope. He is not the pope who will be remembered for his diplomatic achievements, but the one who in the long run may have redefined in a secular age what it means to be a Christian." James does not discuss in this paper whether or not he believes that Pope Francis has compromised Catholic identity with his interfaith co-operation. What he does do is to say that Benedict "was always concerned to define what was left of Catholicism when it had ceased to be an ideological movement. James goes on to talk about how Benedict’s legacy should be judged. The Pope’s decisions have not been "judged rationally. It is impossible to say that he has not performed his duties conscientiously." He says, "I am inclined to think of Pope Benedict as a good pope who was brought low simply because he saw himself as the last guardian of an archaic faith." So it is perhaps no surprise that James believes Francis could go down in history as a good pope who also failed at being the last guardian of an archaic faith. Pope Francis said, “We cannot insist only on issues related to abortion, gay marriage and the use of contraceptive methods. cfa1e77820
Comments