A Book Review by Gerald Archibald, Edmonton

If you are interested in history, particularly Church history, this book is for you. It is extremely well written, the history is detailed, and the research sources cited are impressive. The author is a noted historian, particularly of Church history, and in this book, he focuses on the period 1799 -2018. This is the time period that describes the lowest ebb of papal power to the highest level of such power. Not only does Collins do this in a very scholarly fashion, he also provides a detailed context of the culture and politics (both secular and Church related) covering this 220-year history. This secular and Church history intertwine to a remarkable degree, to the point one can almost see the world through each of the popes’ eyes during each of their reigns.

Paul Collins was a priest in Australia when he wrote: Papal Power: A Proposal for Change in Catholicism’s Third Millennium (1997). Rome did not like this document at all. The Congregation of the Doctrine of Faith in the Vatican at that time was headed up by Cardinal Ratzinger (the future Pope Benedict XVI). He wanted major changes to the document. Having worked with Rome for three years about these concerns and proposed changes, Collins decided he could no longer be a priest under this legalistic approach.

Collins says that from the 1300s to 1978, the popes were addressed as “the father of princes and kings, (and) ruler of the world” (p.XV). He states “What I want to show in this book is that the modern papacy has risen from a near-death experience at the end of the French Revolution to become more centralized and more powerful than ever before in its…history. Nowadays the papacy is one of the most influential institutions in the world and uses both ‘soft’ and ‘hard’ power with skill and ability.”

It is impossible to describe each of the popes in the last 220 years in a book review. So, I had to make a special effort to keep to very basic highlights and themes. The popes had particular personalities and lived in unique cultures. Pope’s tended to be either institutional or pastoral. Institutional means a pope identifies himself with the Church as an institution. They were suspicious of the world and particularly of “modernism” often isolating themselves in the Vatican. The other category of popes saw themselves as pastoral, meaning they viewed the Church as the people of God. They wanted to engage with the world, as it is God’s creation.

The book begins with Pope Pius VI (1775-1799) and Collins states he was “weak” and non-influential. In fact, France and other countries thought the papacy would come to an end upon his death. But through a series of historical twists, this low ebb of the papacy reversed itself. The next hundred years saw society exploring new ideas that affected the Church: society wanted to solve its own problems (rather than being told what to do), and to promote democracy.

It was the time when the industrial revolution was taking hold. All this together, the Church referred to as “modernism”. Through the 1800s, some popes were quick to condemn changes in society. They wanted a Church that harkened back to former times, even if it was the period of kings with their control over much of the Church.

Others embraced change and wanted the Church to be influential in this new world. But a trend was taking shape – the papacy assuming more and more control. The most important papal action of the 1800s was the First Vatican Council called by Pius IX in 1869. The main topic at this Council was papal infallibility.

This was a contentious topic among the Bishops, but after a two-year debate they voted in favour of papal infallibility by a vote of 560-140. Since 1871 up to 2013, the Church continued its centralization efforts despite the decisions of the Second Vatican Council held in the 1960s.

Despite the adoption of infallibility, it has only been exercised once (Pope Pius XII in 1950 declared the dogma of the Assumption of Mary – the mother of Jesus being assumed both body and soul into heaven). Collins describes this new infallibility age as “supreme power to supreme pontiff” (p.59).

Even though power was dramatically increasing in the Church, there were good things happening as well. The late 1800s saw the papacy advocate for social justice. The first encyclical on the topic was issued by Pope Leo XIII in 1891 called “Rerum Novarum”. It was a revolutionary document that provided the foundation upon which Catholic social teaching has been built.

Following this we see Pope Pius X advocating two significant changes: the reception of the Eucharist for children, and the encouragement for all Catholics to frequently receive Communion. Before, and during the Second World War, we see the ‘behind the scenes’ approach of Pius XII to protect the Church and those who were being oppressed by the Nazi regime.

But, the most significant event during the last century was Pope John XXIII’s calling of the Second Vatican Council (1962-65). Pope John died nearly two years after he initiated Vatican II. (Pope Paul VI took over and saw the completion of the Council). This three-year meeting of all the Bishops of the world generated a completely new vision for the Church.

It addressed the Church’s role in the modern world, a more meaningful liturgy in modern languages, the role of Bishops, religious liberty, the laity, and ecumenism to name a few key areas. Parishes were excited about the possibilities which lay ahead.

Then John Paul II was elected Pope in 1978. “No pope has been as powerful…as John Paul II…He took absolute power to its outer limits” (P. 219). He put the brakes on Vatican II reforms. During his tenure, “local leadership, Bishops, and Catholic communities faded into insignificance…his was a one man show” (p.230-231).

Collins goes on to say bluntly “He became the de facto Bishop of the World” (p.236). His great achievements however were bringing the papacy to millions of people by visiting over 100 countries, and in playing a key role in the liberation of Poland from Communism.

Benedict XVI became the next pope in 2005 and basically continued the conservatism shown by Pope John Paul II. An academic, he saw his role as preserving the Church from modernism. As he became older, he realized he did not have the energy and health to carry on and resigned as Pope in 2013.

Pope Francis was elected in 2013 and is our reigning pope. He quickly showed he wanted to lead a simple life. He chose the name Francis, a saint known for his very simple lifestyle. How does one characterize this pope? In March 2020, PBS televised a documentary called ‘Inside the Vatican’. A question was asked of a Cardinal during this program “Is the Pope a conservative or a liberal?” “Neither!” came the reply. “He is a radical!”

Why is Francis a radical? He has moved away from a European style of Church by appointing Cardinals from the ‘outskirts’ of the world – such as Iraq and Bangladesh. He is “outreach” focussed, exhorting Catholics to go to the “margins” to “serve one another”. He even said the Church should be a “field hospital.” One of his most famous urgings was for us to “smell like sheep” (meaning shepherds looking after their flock).

He loves life and the world but is not afraid to call out unbridled capitalism and globalization. Francis also wants to make changes to help people in tough situations (e.g. divorced Catholics and the reception of the Eucharist, married priests to serve Amazon regions.) But the backlash among conservative Bishops and Cardinals has been strong.

On a positive note, Francis has great respect with world leaders. An example is when he was asked by the Cuban and U.S. leaders to promote dialogue between the two countries. This led to mutual recognition by both parties. It is unfortunate that his major obstacles are from within the Church leadership itself.

I would highly recommend this book if you are interested in how we have arrived where we are in terms of the last 220 years and are interested in civil and papal history. Just give yourself enough time for a good read!