The difference between then and now

 Nicole Winfield has a story in the Washington Post about comedienne Sarah Silverman who says that the Vatican should sell itself in order to feed the poor.  "On an ego level alone you will be the biggest hero in the history of ever!" she exclaimed. "Sell the Vatican. Feed the world."

One has to admit that the idea has some intuitive merit.  After all, Jesus did tell the rich man to "get up, sell what you have, give to the poor, and follow me."  If you work in a place where the ceilings were done by Michelangelo, you qualify as "rich."

The Post story goes on to note, however, that the Vatican may be worth less than you think.  Outside of St. Peter's basilica, the rest of the property in the Vatican was valued at 700 million euros in 2004.  Of course, that doesn't include the artwork, which is worth many, many times that.

An Australian author, Morris West, wrote about the church feeding the poor back in 1963.  The book was titled Shoes of the Fisherman.  In it, a Russian--a man who had spent many years in a Soviet gulag--is unexpectedly elected pope.  This occurs at a time when the world is in particular crisis over a massive famine in China.  The book presumes the political tensions of the early 60's.  In 1963, the cold war was at its height, and tensions were increasing between the Soviet Union and China.  

The new Pope comes to believe that the only solution for this humanitarian crisis is for the west to give direct and immediate aid.  At his papal coronation, he removes the tiara--a gesture of humility--and announces to the crowd that the Catholic Church will lead the way.  The church will sell itself--its buildings, its great art--in order to help feed the hungry.  The crowd is stunned into silence, then responds with overwhelming acclaim.

Shoes of the Fisherman was the number one best-seller in 1963.  It was made into a movie in 1968.  The part of Pope Kyril was played by Anthony Quinn.  The film was nominated for two academy awards.

Set these two situations side-by-side.  Then, the idea that the church might lead the way in providing for human need was the basis of an inspiring novel by a popular author.  Today, the idea is presented as a joke by a hip young comedienne. 

Even in 1963, of course, there were already many who were cynical about the church.  Some of that is reflected in West's book.  The new Pope has to fight against entrenched Vatican interests who don't like new ideas.  People didn't respond to Shoes of the Fisherman because they thought the church would really "sell all and give to the poor," but at least people could imagine it happening, and wouldn't it be great if it did?  Today, the very idea is a wisecrack.

The Christian church was interesting in 1963.  The theologies of Paul Tillich and Teilhard de Chardin were fresh, creative, and gaining influence.  Church architecture was inventive.  Vatican II was changing the Catholic world.  (Pope John XXIII died on the very day the film Shoes of the Fisherman was published.)  The ecumenical movement had new spirit and energy.  The Spirit-led civil rights movement was about to break into public awareness.

That was all before the rise of the evangelicals.  Thirty years of sentimental pop theology, dime store music, culture war triumphalism, and abysmal aesthetics have undermined and subverted the public's estimation of the church.  In 1963, people had a sense of possibility about the church.  Today, it's only farce. 

Comments

[Hypatia]

You never know. The Church hasn't lasted as long as it has without having excellent survival skills. Sadly, it was the kind of church that would really sell all and give to the poor, it probably wouldn't still be around. There's a reason why many churches suck up to the rich.

[John Petty]

And, along with excellent survival skills, the knack for shooting itself in the foot at the very same time.

So much for "their great ones lord it over them, but it shall not be so among you." (Mark 10)