The politics of sainthood
Why has the Church chosen this moment to canonize a priest widely accused of
sexual misconduct with women?
BY MICHAEL BRONSKI
Last month's convocation of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops,
held to hammer out an official policy on how to respond to future cases of
clergy sexual abuse, was roundly hailed by the US media as a bold and
progressive step forward for the Roman Catholic Church. Time magazine,
in its usual hype-speak, called it "groundbreaking." The policy worked out at
the Dallas conference, which mandates, among other things, that any priest
found guilty of sexual abuse of a minor will be immediately -- and permanently
-- removed from pastoral work, has to be okayed by Vatican higher-ups before it
can be implemented. Word from the conference president, Bishop Wilton D.
Gregory, is that this approval should not be a problem. Well, maybe yes and
maybe no.
It's not fully appreciated just how unprecedented this conference actually was.
The impetus for forming the new policy came from an extraordinary demand by
American lay Catholics that the US Catholic hierarchy admit its errors and --
contrary to the organization of Roman Catholicism -- follow the lead of the
faithful. It was a stunning moment in the history of the Church. But you need
look no further than the recent canonization of Padre Pio -- a priest who faced
numerous, credible accusations of sexual misconduct with women -- to get an
idea of how seriously (or not) the Vatican is taking the calls for change.
Make no mistake, the process of canonization within the Roman Catholic
Church -- that most methodical and bureaucratic of organizations -- is fraught
with politics. Aside from their spiritual evolution, saints also have
pedagogical functions. They are the Church's poster children and spiritual
heroes. They are promoted in books and on holy cards, statues, religious
portraits, and stained-glass windows. The Vatican makes clear political and
social statements, cloaked in the guise of theology, when it selects its
saints.
Take, for example, the canonization of Maria Goretti. Born in poverty in 1890,
she lived with her family on the outskirts of Rome. In 1902, the 12-year-old
Maria was sexually assaulted by a 19-year-old neighbor. When she resisted, he
stabbed her. When she died a few days later, she told her confessor that she
forgave her assailant and wanted him "to be in paradise" with her. The
assailant was sentenced to 30 years in prison. For the first eight, he harbored
bitterness toward Maria, but repented after she appeared to him in a dream.
Upon his release he received communion -- at a shrine built for the young
martyr -- with Maria's mother at his side. A cult immediately sprang up around
Maria Goretti, making her both a visible and visceral emblem of the chastity of
Catholic youth. She was promoted by Pope Pius XII as an icon of virginity
during the Allied liberation of Italy after World War II, when there was
much concern about sexual immorality among young people. In the years after the
war, as the Vatican became increasingly worried about the effects of movies,
jazz, and other forms of popular culture on Catholic youth, Goretti was
continually brought forward as a model young Catholic. She was beatified in
1947 and canonized in 1950. During the ceremony, Pius XII stated: "From
Maria's story, carefree children and young people with their zest for life can
learn not to be led astray by attractive pleasures which are not only ephemeral
and empty but also sinful." In the United States, Catholic youth were urged to
take the "Modesty Pledge of the Friends of Maria Goretti," which began, "I am
special! My body was made in God's image and how I choose to act, what I choose
to wear, to watch, or listen to, enhances or diminishes the virtues of my
personality."
So what are we to make of the fact that even as the seemingly bottomless
sexual-abuse scandal (which is not, as many believe, limited to the American
Catholic Church) threatens the financial stability of various archdioceses and
erodes Church leaders' authority to speak on issues of public morality, the
Vatican has just made a saint of a priest who was accused of sexual conduct
with countless women as well as acting in effeminate ways? The canonization of
Pio, now known as Saint Pio de Pietrelcina (after his birthplace near Naples,
Italy), tells us that the Vatican's crusade under Pope John Paul II to
bring Rome back to its pre-Vatican II past is alive and well.
ONE OF THE MOST remarkable -- and remarked upon -- aspects of Pio's
canonization has been the short length of time between the priest's death and
his declared sainthood. The Vatican generally takes a long view of history, and
it has not been unusual for at least 100 years to pass between a subject's
death and the discussion of his or her sainthood. St. Elizabeth Ann Seton, for
instance, died in 1821 and was not even put up for canonization until 1940; she
was finally declared a saint in 1975. But it took less then 34 years from the
time of the Capuchin friar's death in 1968, at age 81, to his being made a
saint. In Vatican time, this is a speedier fast-tracking than the derailment of
habeas corpus has received at the hands of John Ashcroft. Padre Pio's
accelerated path toward official holiness is even more remarkable given his
history with the Vatican.
While the media coverage of Padre Pio's canonization has been respectful, it
did hint that Pio was an unusual candidate for sainthood. The New York
Times coverage began with the ironic headline THE FRIAR, MIRACULOUSLY,
MARCHES INTO SAINTHOOD and then noted with some delicacy that "in the past,
Rome took a dim view" of Padre's Pio's life and reputation. Most other news
reports noted that Pio, though popular, was controversial. This is, as one
might expect when talking about a newly minted saint, putting it kindly.
The last 50 years of Pio's life were fraught with scandal. He was accused of
sexual impropriety, attacked for public episodes of rage aimed at penitents,
and accused of accepting money in the confessional. His numerous critics --
both within and outside the Church -- claimed that Pio, far from being a saint,
was nothing more than a self-serving monomaniac who shamelessly promoted
himself as the center of a popular cult. The impetus of the cult was his claim
to having been blessed with the stigmata -- the bleeding wounds of Christ on
the hands, feet, and side. The Vatican took these claims so seriously that it
ordered a series of investigations into his behavior. Even the Capuchins had
such serious qualms about their most famous member's sanctity that they had his
cell -- and, many claim, his confessional -- bugged. It was an ecclesiastical
Watergate, and let's face it: no one has been looking to canonize Richard Nixon
lately. The general media presumption is that Pio's rapid canonization occurred
in spite of his checkered past. But that is too kind. It is far more likely
that his swift and nimble ascent to sainthood occurred precisely because of his
past.
Born Francesco Forgione in 1887 to poor peasants living in the rural Italian
village of Pietrelcina, Pio grew up a delicate and devout child, with many
health problems. At the age of 15, in 1902, he was accepted into the Capuchins
-- an independent branch of the Franciscans -- and given the name Fra Pio
(Brother Pius). From the beginning, Pio sought to express his devotion by
becoming -- in the words of Saint Theresa of Avila -- "a victim of divine
love." For Pio, this meant physical self-mortification. He would engage in
extravagant fasting (once refusing all food but the Eucharist for three weeks);
as a novice, he self-flagellated until he bled. Not surprisingly, he became so
chronically ill that he had to leave the monastery for periods of time. He was
well enough to be ordained in 1910, but soon began struggling with fairly
extraordinary spiritual difficulties. He wrote to a friend that the devil --
literally -- came at night with "every sort of fantasy to tempt me into
thoughts of [sexual] uncleanness," and he became increasingly ill. This
illness, Pio's lifelong friend Mercurio Scocca said, was brought on by sexual
frustration. Later that year, Pio announced, "I do want to suffer, even to die
of suffering, but all in secret," and in 1911 he received what he claimed to be
early markings -- technically called a "proto-stigmata" -- of the wounds of
Christ on his hands (the doctor attached to the monastery could not explain
them). Over the next few years, Pio experienced trances during which he spoke
to Mary and Jesus, as well as episodes of continued wrestling with the devil.
In 1918 word circulated that Pio, who had already been gaining a public
reputation for saintliness, had also been granted such spiritual gifts as the
ability to read minds, speak to spirits, and bilocate, or exist in two places
at the same time. Most spectacularly -- and notoriously -- rumor had it that he
had been blessed with the full stigmata: bleeding wounds that shed up to a cup
of blood a day, but which had the fragrance of flowers.
As Pio's fame for holiness grew, so did criticism. From the 1920s onward, the
Vatican was deluged with letters claiming that Pio was behaving inappropriately
with women in the confessional and even that he brought women to his cell,
where they stayed all night. Others accused Pio of "pomading his hair,"
perfuming his body, and even wearing makeup. Still more asserted that he
accepted money in the confessional -- a charge that Pio granted was true, but
claimed that he passed the money on to more needy penitents. There was also the
matter of his nearly uncontrollable and often inexplicable rage, which he would
unleash at a moment's notice on selected penitents and visitors. As early as
1922, the Vatican forbade him to hear the confessions of women, give blessings
to people, or let the public know in advance when he would celebrate Mass. In
1923, he was forbidden to teach teenage boys in the school attached to the
monastery because the Holy See considered him "a noxious Socrates, capable of
perverting the fragile lives and souls of boys." But when the Vatican tried to
transfer Pio to another monastery, the village in which he lived went into full
revolt; the threat of a riot was so great that the national police force had to
be called in.
More troubling to some people, though, was Pio's intense relationship with
Adelaide Pyle, an American soap-flake heiress, who became obsessed with the
friar in 1924. She eventually joined the third order of Franciscans, built a
house next door to Pio's monastery to entertain luminaries who came to visit
him, and gave much of her money to his charities. There were also disconcerting
rumors of his fascist sympathies during World War II. The controversy
continued, and as late as 1960 the newly elected Pope John XXIII launched
yet another investigation into Pio's life and practices. Not surprisingly, Pio
was dismayed by many of the changes introduced by Vatican II and was even
granted special permission to continue to say Mass in Latin.
Clearly, Pio was not a shoo-in for sainthood. Over the past 100 years, the
Vatican has been very careful to disassociate itself from "miracles"
(especially stigmata) that might be exposed as frauds. It has also been equally
wary of popular cults over which it has little control. Therefore, it came very
much as a surprise when the Capuchins submitted Pio's name to the Vatican for
beatification (the first step toward canonization) in 1969, just a year after
his death. Its immediate acceptance came as an even greater surprise, since
such proposals are usually not permitted until five years after the candidate's
death. In 1999, Pio was beatified -- again, in a very short time -- and after a
brief trip to the altar, he became a full-fledged saint.
BUT MAYBE Pio's sainthood shouldn't be so surprising. His canonization fits
right in with Pope John Paul II's conservative political agenda. Indeed,
the politics of canonization have become overtly conservative under his
pontificate. Early on in his tenure, the pope gutted the traditional process of
canonization by abolishing the office of the Devil's Advocate (a Vatican
official who would voice all the arguments against canonization) and changing
the rules for the number of miracles needed for canonization. (Prior to those
changes, multiple miraculous works -- usually cures of dire physical illnesses
that cannot be explained by science -- were required of those put up for
sainthood. Historically, candidates needed two miracles for beatification and
two for canonization. They now need only one for each.) While this might appear
to be a progressive streamlining of the old-time Vatican bureaucracy, the
reality is that it has made it easier for John Paul II to approve
canonizations. Indeed, since his ascension to the Chair of Peter in 1978, John
Paul II has canonized 283 new saints -- more than were sainted in the 407
years directly preceding him. And they haven't been just any saints. John
Paul II has canonized those who fit his highly conservative political
agenda.
In keeping with John Paul II's strong anti-communism, for instance, he
beatified four men in 2001 who had been murdered under the Soviet regime:
Nikita Budka, who died in 1949; Josaphat Chichkov, who died in 1952; and
Metodio Domenico Trcka and Kamen Vitcher, both of whom died in 1959. His
frequent denunciations of South and Central American radical "liberation
theology" were backed with appropriate saints: this year the Vatican beatified
Maria Romero Meneses, a wealthy Nicaraguan nun who supported the Somoza regime
and worked with the upper classes to help the poor. She died in 1977. Juan
Diego, a peasant who died in 1548 and reportedly saw a vision of Our Lady of
Guadalupe in 1531, was beatified in 1990. He was canonized this year and
praised by the pope for humbly accepting his station in life. Of course, a
decade passed before the name of left-leaning Salvadoran archbishop Oscar
Romero -- killed by right-wing assassins while saying Mass in 1980 and regarded
by many in his country as a saint and martyr -- was even allowed to be entered
on the list of those put up for beatification.
The pope's political prejudices were also evident in his 2001 beatification of
the Martyrs of Valencia -- pro-Franco clergy and lay people who died during the
Spanish Civil War. Particularly notable was his treatment of José
María Escrivá de Balaguer, a well-known Spanish anti-Semite,
crucial supporter of Franco's fascist regime, and founder of the right-wing
Roman Catholic organization Opus Dei. De Balaguer died in 1975; he was
beatified in 1992 and will be canonized in October of 2002. While he never
openly supported Hitler, he was widely quoted as saying, "Hitler against the
Jews, Hitler against the Slavonic, means Hitler against communism." (These
beatifications and canonizations are particularly striking given that, in 1962,
Pope Paul VI had placed an interdict on proceeding with the cause of the
Spanish Civil War martyrs because he did not want to be seen as favoring the
Franco regime.)
Perhaps most notorious in recent years, though, has been John Paul II's
promotion of saints who were killed by the Nazis. Two priests -- Maximilian
Kolbe (who died in 1941 and was beatified in 1971) and Titus Brandsma (who died
in 1942 and was beatified 1985) -- caused some to comment that the Church
sought to Christianize the Holocaust. Kolbe's case in particular drew the ire
of Jewish groups, since as a writer and magazine editor in Poland, Kolbe had
promoted the belief that The Protocols of the Elders of Zion was not an
anti-Semitic forgery but the work of "a cruel, crafty, little known Jewish
clique" who had let themselves "be seduced by Satan."
But the charge of Christianizing the Holocaust became an international cause
célèbre with the beatification of Edith Stein in 1987 and her
canonization in 1998. Stein was a Jewish convert to Roman Catholicism who
became a Carmelite nun, taking the name Sister Teresa Benedicta of the Cross.
She was arrested in 1942 and died in Auschwitz -- not because she was a
Catholic resisting Nazism, but because she was Jewish. At the end of her life
Stein wrote a "spiritual will and testament" that asked God to accept her life
"for the atonement of the unbelief of the Jewish people and for this: that the
Lord may be accepted by his own people [Jews] . . . "
Stein's canonization was met with enormous opposition from Jews and many
Catholics who felt that the Vatican was cynically and immorally canonizing as a
martyr a woman who was executed for being Jewish. Jewish leaders worried that
John Paul II was going to use the canonization of Stein to start a Vatican
campaign to convert Jews. Even worse, many suggested, the Vatican sainted Stein
to combat increasing criticism of that era's pope -- Pius XII -- for
failing to take a strong public stand, befitting his high spiritual office,
against the Nazis or the Holocaust. These complaints were not baseless. In his
homily at Stein's canonization, the pope claimed that when Stein converted from
Judaism, "she discovered that truth had a name: Jesus Christ." To make matters
worse, one section of his homily was titled "Only the Love of Christ Makes Us
Truly Free" -- a grotesque parody of the phrase "Work Makes You Free"
("Arbeit Macht Frei"), which was emblazoned across the gates of
Auschwitz. So much for the Vatican's highly touted campaign to apologize for
past anti-Semitic behavior.
IN THIS CONTEXT, the canonization of Padre Pio, as well as the public-relations
hoopla that the Vatican has attached to it, makes perfect sense. The pope's
conservative politics, his retrograde vision of the Church, and his insistence
on being a top-down manager -- well, let's face it, it's not called a hierarchy
for nothing -- find a perfect match in this new saint. Indeed, who better to
sanctify in the midst of a worldwide crisis concerning priestly sexual abuse
(of various kinds) than a priest who has been accused of such behavior and
vindicated in the course of canonization? While the priest sex scandal is now
in full bloom, it is important to remember that it has been in the making for
at least two decades. One might imagine that "the cause" -- as the Vatican puts
it -- of Padre Pio's canonization would have progressed more quickly if the
cases of John Geoghan or Father Porter had never reached the courtroom. Even
Padre Pio's old-fashioned, damn-near-medieval mysticism -- what other saint has
claimed the power of bilocation in the past two centuries? -- would have been a
mark against him in the more enlightened church of the 1970s. But under John
Paul II, it's seen by the Vatican as a return of traditional spiritual
values -- mysteries that are beyond explanation and that must be believed and
accepted on faith alone. Indeed, the very acceptance of the miraculousness of
Padre Pio's stigmata can be seen as reflecting the church's hostility to modern
science, particularly its reproductive technologies and stem-cell research.
Don't forget, the Vatican's official agreement with Galileo came less than two
decades ago, and that was after a 13-year-long investigation by the Holy See.
Let's not kid ourselves: whatever progress the United States Conference of
American Bishops made in bringing the Roman Catholic Church out of the Dark
Ages will face strong opposition from Rome. The Vatican may rubber-stamp the
new US policy on the sexual abuse of children -- though that is by no means a
foregone conclusion, as a Holy See spokesman has already stated that canon law
does not require the reporting of abuse by priests to law-enforcement
officials. Either way, the conservative legacy of Pope John Paul II,
including all those he's marched into sainthood, will be with us for a very
long time.
Michael Bronski is the author of The Pleasure Principle: Sex, Backlash,
and the Struggle for Gay Freedom (St. Martin's, 1998). He can be reached at mabronski@aol.com.
Issue Date: July 12 - 18, 2002
|