Wednesday, February 22, 2012
On the Importance of Vatican City
David Quinn writes, in The Independent:
Many people no longer seem to have a clue why the Catholic Church should also have a state that is called the Holy See. Some of us seem to imagine it is purely for reasons of vanity.
But only someone lacking the faintest knowledge of church history could think such a thing because all down the centuries rulers have sought to bend popes to their will. . . .
https://mirrorofjustice.blogs.com/mirrorofjustice/2012/02/on-the-importance-of-vatican-city.html
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the
comment feed
for this post.
History certainly agrees with the conclusion that "all down the centuries rulers have sought to bend popes to their will[s]." History also supports the conclusion that these will-bending efforts have not all gone in one direction. As heads of state through the centuries, Popes have used their temporal powers just as any other head of state might elect to do. (They have also, of course, used their spiritual power.) It is certainly true that the temporal power of the Popes has declined in recent centuries, but there have been times in the more distant past when that power has been formidable indeed. Popes have led armies, waged war, beseiged cities, and generally acted as heads of state in their respective time periods. And given that he who lives by the sword shall die by the sword, it seems to me also to be true that any head of state who elects to operate through military force must perforce agree to take his chances.
Incidentally, I fully agree with the underlying proposition that people do not know enough history. I also agree that the Holy See has a rich history and that its existence has nothing to do with vanity.