The Polishness of the Pope
Timothy Garton Ash
`The "Polishness" of the Pope is essential to his papacy,' the good Lord (Longford) instructs us. We may safely assume that on this point the Holy Father would agree with his venerable biographer. Indeed, John Paul II is known to believe that he has discovered — through prayer and meditation — God's special purpose in electing a Pole to St Peter's throne in the last quarter of the 20th century. God in- tends that certain special qualities of Polish Catholicism should now be propagated to the world.
The Polish background, therefore, sheds light on several features of the present pon- tificate which are important for the British visit. First, there is Wojtyla's special blend of outspoken liberalism in the defence of human rights against dictatorships of whatever colour, and unbending conser- vatism on ethical questions — no con- traception, no abortion, no divorce. This is a combination puzzling to western eyes. It does not fit our categories of liberal or con- servative, left or right, progressive or reac- tionary. But in the Polish context it makes Perfect sense.
The language of God-given, inalienable human rights which permeates the documents of the Second Vatican Council Was enthusiastically adopted by the Polish church in the late 1960s, after Karol Wojtyla, Archbishop of Cracow since 1964, had been made the country's second Cardinal. It gave a new and broader base to the Church's struggle against the intrusions of an atheist state into every corner of the nation's life. Here was a notion to which the communists themselves paid lip service: their constitution is drafted in terms of guaranteeing basic rights. Here was a language in which the Church could make Common cause with democratic socialists
who also wished to defend the rights of the Polish society against a communist dic- tatorship. And here was a language which workers could understand and apply for themselves, as they proceeded to do, with stunning results, in Solidarity. Small wonder Cardinal Wojtyla embraced this part of Vatican II so eagerly.
At the same time, in a country where all the institutions of state Irri been controlled for more than a century by foreign or atheist powers, the family has acquired an unparallelled importance as the only institu- tion of true religion and true patriotism. Generations of Poles have grown up, and still grow up, in this frame of primary loyalties — Family, Church, and Nation inside a state which they do not regard as their own. Jaruzelskis come and go, but the family remains, the impenetrable keep of Catholic patriotism. Does not the special Polish experience go some way to explain the Pope's sensitivity to any attack on the sanctity of the family?
Then there is the highly personalised pastoral style. Of course his predecessors set precedents for papal travel. Of course his own radiant personality, his powerful physical presence, his command of lan- guages, his actor's skills, uniquely equip him for this kind of populist papacy. Yet, as Peter Nichols interestingly suggests in The Pope's Divisions, it may also be the product of Polish circumstances. Wojtyla was ordained priest in 1946. He began his ministry in a country which had suffered worse than any under the Nazis. The pastoral role was therefore paramount. But in a militantly atheist state there were few institutions or structures through which he was allowed to work: schools, the youth organisations, the wireless, later the televi- sion, were all denied him. In response he
developed this highly personalised pastoral style, travelling widely, throwing open his house to all his flock, appealing directly to the people, and perfecting that extraord- inary gift of making every single individual in a vast crowd feel that he is speaking privately to him or her.
Thirdly, there is the theme of unity. John Paul II sees it as a mission of the first Slav Pope to reassert, no, to reforge, the `spiritual unity of Christian Europe'. This means, above all, reconciliation with the churches of the East — Orthodox, Uniate, Old Catholic — but reconciliation with the Protestant churches of western Europe, and especially the British churches, is also an important part of his ecumenical mission. Here there is a certain tension in his leader- ship. On the one hand there is his great openness to his flock, a pastoral love which embraces all peoples, creeds and colours, asserting the dignity of every human being under whatever church or system. On the other hand there is his authoritarian toughness with his shepherds: priests must be male, celibate, and obedient to Rome; the religious orders must be celibate, and obedient to Rome; the theologians must be obedient to Rome.
Peter Hebblethwaite, writing in last Saturday's Guardian, seems to suggest that this authoritarianism has to do with the Polish national character. I think there is a simpler Polish explanation. For 35 years the Polish Church has been faced with a com- munist state which has done everything in its power to break and divide its religious opponents. The state has hunted high and low for ecclesiastical quislings, lavishing patronage on splinter groups and popular lay Catholic organisations. According to Cracow gossip, Wojtylawas only chosen as archbishop after the authorities had re- jected several prior candidates. Certainly the authorities saw in him a more com- promising Church leader than the then primate, Cardinal Wyszynski, and made strenuous efforts to drive a wedge between the two cardinals. Discipline and unity thus became top priorities in an embattled Church. Wojtyla has carried these priorities with him to Rome. But the position here is quite different; there is no universal com- munist state plotting, as Poland's com- munist rulers most definitely did plot, to divide and rule the universal Church. There is a sense in which Professors Schillebeeckx and Kling are victims of Polish com- munism.
The Pope may reason that only a disciplined, united Church will be strong enough to open itself to the demands of ecumenism. Yet the reassertion of supreme papal authority, which he sees as a means to the glorious end of reunifying Christen- dom, is at the same time, in the eyes of many other Christians, the greatest single obstacle to reunification. His British homilies, which he will, as always, have written himself after much reflection, may give us some indication of how he hopes to resolve the apparent contradiction between these two concepts of unity.
Previous page
