Rating: 
Summary: Untenable, TIME magazine theology...
Review: Garry Wills' essay contains much to both offend knowledgeable detractors and chasten overly-impressed supporters. For example, Wills fails to state that the Catholic Papacy has invoked the doctrine of INFALLIBILITY only twice in its history. Both Ex Cathedra prouncements concern unique "grace" dispensations asserted to The Blessed Virgin Mother, Mary. To wit: The Immaculate Conception and The Assumption. These dogmas may be esoteric, confusing or untenable to non-Catholics but they are certainly not unknown to Mr. Wills. PAPAL SINS failure to note that the good offices and personal intervention of Pope Pius XII during the Holocaust resulted in the...historically incontestable...saving of over 800,000 Jewish lives is indign. As is...in my estimate...Wills' failure to examine, not merely denounce, the Church's positions on Birth Control and Abortion. The Catholic Magisterium contends that a "cavalier" attitude toward sexuality and sexual ontology (homosexual orientation) has contributed both to a climate of divorce and an abortion mentality that now asserts even Partial-birth abortion as a Constitutional Right. That the abortion rate...approximately 1.5 million/year since Roe v. Wade in 1973...stands at approximately 30.5%, implies that The Church's position merits, perhaps, a more thoughtful analysis. To those interested in the Catholic Church's position on its Teaching Authority I propose the writings of Karl Rahner...particularly, FOUNDATIONS OF CHRISTIAN FAITH...and, the "zeit-geist" theology of Hans Kung. For superbly witten and accessible commentary on THE UNIVERSAL CHURCH, I recommend the justly reputed studies of Jaroslav Pelikan. To interested readers, I additonally suggest that Pope John Paul II's, THE SPLENDOR OF TRUTH (Veritatis Splendor)an essay defending the legitamcy of subsistent truth, will provide insight into the metaphysical, as well as theological, underpinings of recent Papal declarations. This is my second effort...after a second reading...of PAPAL SINS:Structures of Deceit. As some reviewers have noted, Popes are aware of their "human, all too human" limitations. Therefore, a weekly SACRAMENTAL confession is customarily observered. I stand by a previous evaluation that much of Garry Wills essay is more consistent with TIME magazine theology. His efforts to essay the role of a contemporary Martin Luther are, in my estimate, manifestly untenable..."Hier ich stande...Ich kann nicht ander."
Rating:
Summary: Deceit
Review: If there is any deceit in the Catholic church it is on the part of Mr. Wills. It used to be that bigotry came from without now it comes from within. Mr. Wills is no longer Catholic and has no business receiving the sacraments. He wouldn't get them in my parish. If you want to know the truth about the Catholic church this is NOT the book for you.
Rating:
Summary: The deceit here is not in the papacy. . .
Review: This title is misleading. The casual observer, upon seeing this book, might think about the medival papacy; the various schisms; the various anti-popes; even the few absolute scoundrels which occupied the Throne of Peter. One would not expect what one gets.From the perspective of this non-Roman Catholic clergyman and historian, it seems that the best thing that Mr. Wills could do would be to leave the Catholic Church (but please don't come to mine!) If Mr. Wills had not been such a highly regarded author in the past, no one but a radical anti-Catholic publishing house would have touched this manuscript. Mr. Wills is not satisfied with his dissent on matters of faith and morals: abortion, contraception, homosexuality, ordination of women, ministry of the priesthood, Office of Peter, Real Presence in the Eucharist, etc.,(one wonders what's left - what he DOES believe in) but makes the asinine assertion that the Papacy doesn't believe in many of these things either, but continue to pronounce on them in order to remain in power. Such a charge, one would expect, would be thoroughly documented and backed up with numerous examples from primary source material. Instead, one finds the same sort of drivel that one finds in a Jack Chick tract. If Mr. Wills wishes to dissent on virtually every issue upon which the Catholic Church teaches, that is certainly his right. But he (and, frankly, his publisher) should be ashamed that this book, as written, ever came to see the light of day.
Rating: 
Summary: Courage and Integrity
Review: Thanks to Gary Wills for superb scholarship and insightful courage. This book should be the agenda for Vatican III. Dr. Wills documents the issues and dynamics that create a dystunctional church that drives away the intelligent and sincere seekers of God in our time and in times past. He articulates with care, concern for his church, and love of truth the development of systems, structures, and 'theologies' that have served vested interests instead of serving the people to whom the church is missioned by its founder. I and many Catholics whom I know and love have struggled with the same medieval burocracy, the imperialist moralistic attitudes, and the misplaced priorities of wealth, power, and ambition that Dr. Wills not only indicts but also dissects with precision and attention to history. This book is a must for an intelligent Catholic who wants to understand how we have come to our sorry hidebound state and who is looking for a clue-blueprint for reform. Thanks for the service, Gary, and keep up the good fight!
Rating:
Summary: Anatomy of a Screed
Review: After I had read this book all I could say was...Wow! It has been a good long while since I have read anything as embarrasingly bad as Papal Sins. But it is a rhetorician's dream. When the church's position on modernity is at issue, Wills doesn't bother to confront the issue and instead lauches into an ad hominen attack on Pius IX. When Natural Law is at issue, Wills proudly launches into an ad hominen attack of Aquinas. (You wouldn't even know there was a neo-thomist movement--which has been kind of influential--as Wills never noticed it. When the issue is apostolic succesion Wills makes the statement that no Catholic writers today back the traditional church teachings on the subject, a claim that either A) represents incredibly shoddy research (read Stephen K Ray's "Upon This Rock" for a good starter bibliography on the subject) or B) a willful ignoring of reality. Actually the ignorance Wills displays about the most basic facts concerning the Catholic faith is shocking. Since I must keep this under 1000 words I'll just give one: Wills seems unaware that there is a difference between the church's position on women's ordination (a matter of dogma) and its position on priestly celibacy (only a church rule, which could be changed without altering the faith.) That such a basic point escaped Wills is simply amazing (or the fact that he didnt think actually giving the church's ACTUAL position was something worth doing) speaks to the books lack of..well, professional merit. Basically Wills seems annoyed that the Catholic Church hasn't adopted the 1984 Democratic Party platform as their new catechism of faith. For example, the church is at variance with the Democrats on abortion & contraception, so Wills spends page after page dealing with these issues. The church is NOT at variance with the Democrats (or at least were not back in 1984) when it comes to the death penalty, so Wills never mentions it, despite the fact that a great many american Catholics support the death penalty. So why doesn't Wills spend time complaining about Rome's position on the dath penalty when it is dictated to American Catholics?? For all his claims to the contrary it becomes clear that Wills concerns are ideological not religious. His "botching" of the facts begins to look more willful than accidental, and his book comes across as a biggoted screed.
Rating:
Summary: Poorly Done
Review: While I enjoyed Wills' other books, this one is a dud. Wills launches into poorly constructed arguments against the Catholics and points out numerous times how Popes have sinned. The big problem with this is that most Catholics know that the Pope is not perfect, and that he goes to confession like any other Catholic. If the Pope goes to confession, then he has sinned, right? Then he is not perfect. That infallibility thing I have found is an authority (very roughly) similar to our President's Veto power; exercised only when it is clearly called for. Furthermore, Wills goes about stating the obvious - people in positions of power are not perfect. Duh. Do we not have morally lacking leaders in the USA (i.e., Clinton)? Lastly, so the Catholic leadership has made mistakes, so what? Does the fact that a leader of a religious group is a human being and is not perfect somehow erase all value of that religion's philosophy or group? No. If we find a corrupt police chief, does this mean that having police in general is wrong? No. BTW, I'm not a Catholic, but I have done personal research into theirs and other Christian belief systems. Sounds to me like Wills needs to do the same. This book comes off as a long, bitter rant. Read his book about Lincoln, that one is much better.
Rating: 
Summary: Challenging Book
Review: The final chapter of "Papal Sin" redeems the book. It presents a noble vision of a Catholic Church whose leaders do not lie and deceive and whose people are open to the promptings of the Holy Spirit. "Papal Sin" contains some provocative discussions of Pius IX and the First Vatican Council; the church and the Holocaust; Paul VI and "Humanae Vitae;" the priesthood and women in the church. All is not well, but we should not want to shoot the messenger, as some would like to. Nevertheless, one can disagree with some of Wills' positions while accepting his thesis that the Catholic Church contains "structures of deceit." For instance, why was Maximillian Kolbe not motivated by his faith when he gave his life for another during World War II? Can Paul VI's papacy be fairly summed up by "Humane Vitae?" Can not Mary be a model for the church without being used as a weapon against women? Sometimes Wills cites Aristotle to show how the church has been wrong to rely on his thinking, however Christianized. Sometimes Wills cites Aristotle to support his own position on an issue. He seems inconsistant in this respect, because he doesn't tell us his criteria for evaluating ancient writers. This can be a bit irritating. Although some reviewers had said that "Papal Sin" covers too many topics, I wish Wills would have written in detail about the Vatican banking scandal. Deceit was working overtime in that situation. "Papal Sin" seems to have been written in haste, and like many books today, sloppily edited. Yet, it is worth reading and sharing with Catholics, especially young Catholics.
Rating:
Summary: Exposure of anti-semitism most important
Review: "Papal Sin" affected me profoundly in its reverence for truth and morality. The messages I take from Wills' book are: 1. Moral authority cannot proceed from lies, deception, evasion, cover-up; and the Catholic church as an institution has no moral authority at this time. 2. Anti-semitism still is promulgated by at least the hierarchy of the Catholic Church in deceptions as the canonization of Edith Stein and cover-ups as "We Remember." The chapters on anti-semitism and the Holocaust are the most devastating indictments of the Curia up to and including John Paul II. I am not Jewish, but would be insulted by the Stein incident and "We Remember," which placed blame only on individual Catholics who did not follow church teachings. Anti-semitism in general in the world (not limited to the Catholic church institution) stands in the way of evolving standards of decency in the world and elimination of violence. 3. The concept of reconciliation is the moral requirement where truth is told and deception finally cast out and violence can be eliminated. This is the reconciliation practiced after the end of apartheid in South Africa as a natural extension of the message of non-violence of Ghandi and Martin Luther King, Jr. It is to the shame of the Catholic church that it has yet to embrace this true message of Christ--hopefully not through envy that the message has been brought to the word by a Hindu, Baptist and Episcopalian (Bishop Tutu). This book has generated great interest and insight to readers such as I. In the way of St. Augustine, many Catholic reviewers on these pages welcome "Papal Sin" for its revelations and challenge to focus light on the lies and deceptions so that the Catholic church can set an example for moral behavior.
Rating:
Summary: Poor Effort by Wills
Review: Wills really dropped the ball on this one. Wills seems to argue logically most of the time, but never seems to be able to really put together a coherent argument. Wills doesn't seem to even understand the concepts of the church he supposedly "exposes". So Catholics make mistakes? So what?! Every single member of every other religion also makes mistakes; The Pope goes to confession like any other human being, and Wills doesn't seem to get it. The Pope does not speak infallibly every time he opens his mouth, and those who understand the concept understand they are free to have a voice of their own. In the end, this is a poor effort by Wills... try one of his other books.
Rating:
Summary: Searching critique marred by peevish tone, one-sidedness
Review: I saw Wills on the Charlie Rose show. I'd not read any of his books before but had the impression that he was a serious scholar of some kind. The subject matter of the book intrigued me despite the sensational title. I was struck by his inability, and seeming disinterest, in conveying to Rose, clearly ignorant of Catholic if not Christian teaching, the positive reasons for remaining in the church and for religious commitment in general. His responses to many of Rose's questions. in which he easily could have given an apologia even for his own brand of faith, were cursory at best. He left hanging implications from his critique that would certainly confirm in the mind of curious non-believers their skepticism about religion generally. That is exactly the danger of such strident critiques, that the truth in them is overwhelmed by the misunderstanding they create and the prejudice they feed. It plays precisely into the hands of the very opponents Wills claims he is unmasking, the conservative Curia types who want to circle the wagons against modernist questioning. As a mostly liberal Catholic I agree with most of the positions taken by Wills: there should be married priests, women priests, acceptance of contraception, greater decentralization and democratization of church governance, thoroughgoing reform of the operation of papal primacy. I disagree on his apparent positions on abortion (i.e. because no one can say with precision when human life becomes a human person it is really a matter for private judgment and interpretation), the real presence in the Eucharist (Christ is not in the elements of bread and wine but solely in the people who share in the symbol), and the basic teaching authority of the hierarchy (it's really non-existent because it would have to derive from the democratic? consent of the faithful and/or biblical authority). Notably, the latter two positions align Wills more with Protestant tradition than Catholic and raises the question of the parameters of calling oneself a Catholic. Yet the problem with Wills is not so much these positions, but his way of making them. There is an unremitting peevish tone in his arguments and rhetoric epitomized in the very title of his book. Papal "sin" implies that the conservative positions of the popes that he decries are the result of personal, willful corruption and conscious deceit. While he shies away from this assertion by sometimes empahsizing the "structures" that lead to deceit, at other times his rhetoric clearly implies bad faith. For example, he "knows" that Paul VI issued "Humanae Vitae" solely to protect papal prerogatives and the belief in the inerrancy of the church magisterium (teaching authority). Therefore, Paul VI was completely intellectually dishonest. Nowhere does he explain how he knows this other than his assumption that anyone must be dishonest to believe it. In this, as in his other examples, he makes no attempt to give any reasonable account of the arguments on the other side. This may aid his thesis of papal corruption but it is intellectually dishonest on his part. It lead to doubt that he is honestly using the abundant sources that he cites for his positions. The natural law argument against contraception is not convincing to most modern minds, admittedly, but it is not palpably absurd as Wills would suggest. If so, then every tradition in the church that has been in some way premised on premodern rationales would be the subject for contempt rather than respectful revision. Again, with contraception, Wills fails even to acknowledge the pastoral concern about the connection between contraception and the undermining of tradtitional sexual morality (sex only in marriage). Is there any doubt that the freedom created by contraception has contributed to the disjunction between committed love and sex in Western cultures since the 60s? Wills does not make clear his position on sexual morality but he gives dismissive short shrift to the great change in the attitude represented by Vatican II and John Paul II on the dignity of sexual love in marriage. He complains now that John Paul II thinks that sexual love is too holy and perfect! As if the Pope had no business conveying his views of the spiritual dimension of sex to the faithful. I was hoping to find a constructive critique of the church but instead I found a mostly petty, vindictive diatribe lacking in charity and the kind of faith exemplified by the very heroes that Wills pays homage to - Augustine, Newman, John XXIII.
|
