It is intuitively obvious that the late John Paul II contributed
greatly to the peaceful collapse of communism in the last
quarter of the 20th century, but how?
In the mountain of memorial appreciations written about the
Polish priest who became pope, a column by Washington Post
columnist Anne Applebaum stood out.
As the Warsaw correspondent for The Economist in the late
1980s, Applebaum saw firsthand the collapse of the Soviet
system. She had real insight into how, as pope, Karol Wojtyla
had "helped overthrow communism."
There were plenty of conspiracy theories going about in those
days, she noted, secret negotiations with Mikhail Gorbachev,
that sort of thing. But in fact, his contribution was
far more mundane.
In a communist system in which the state claimed ownership,
not just of productive assets of the economy but of the truth
itself, the church, first in Poland and then elsewhere, "broke
the two monopolies, offering people a safe place to meet and
intellectually offering them an alternative way of thinking
about the world."
When she first moved to Poland, she recalled, "I was told
that if I wanted to know what was going on, I'd have to go
each week to a particular Warsaw church and pick up a copy
of the city's underground weekly newspaper. Equally, if I
wanted to see an exhibition of paintings that were not the
work of the regime's artists, or a play that was not approved
by the regime's censors, I could go to an exhibition or a
performance in a church basement.
"The priests didn't write the newspapers, or paint the paintings,
or act in the plays -- none of which were necessarily religious
-- but they made their space and resources available to the
people who did." And in doing to, they were following
the example of a man who had secretly studied for the priesthood
during the Nazi occupation and founded an underground theater
himself.
Meanwhile, the advice of a priest friend sent me back to
the basic documents of Vatican II, the great council of the
leaders of the church convened by Pope John XXIII in October
1962. (Vatican I, had been interrupted nearly a century
before by the Franco-Prussian War; the previous council met
at Trent, 1545-1563.) Vatican II took three years to do its
work. Its most conspicuous decision was to give up the Latin
mass in favor of worship in vernacular languages.
When someone asked John XXIII why the council
was needed, he reportedly first went to a window and opened
it, then replied: "I want to throw open the windows of the
Church so that we can see out and the people can see in."
The convocation became a fundamental contributor to
the pattern of liberalization of the 1960s.
Most bishops from communist countries were forbidden by their
governments to attend. But some participated, and among the
draftsmen of the section in the document on the pastoral role
of the church (Gaudium
et Spes, or Joys and Hopes) was a young Polish bishop
named Wojtyla.
My friend explained that within the church, it was believed
that Wojtyla's influence on the pastoral blueprint's overall
tone had much to do with his later being elected pope 13 years
later.
The twelve pages of chapter three, on economic and social
life, had much to say about the very concrete problems facing
a world divided by a Cold War. It celebrated increasing productivity;
encouraged technological progress and the spirit of enterprise;
called for increasing democratization of decision-making (development
was "not to be left to the judgment of a few individuals or
groups possessing too much economic power"); endorsed the
right of workers to form unions in all nations; and affirmed
the insurance and social security institutions of the welfare
state; and urged wise macroeconomic policies so that weak
countries would not suffer unjust losses from inflation.
The document identified income inequality as a growing problem.
"At the very time when economic progress... could do so much
to reduce social inequalities, it serves all too often only
to aggravate them; in some places, it even leads to a decline
in the situation of the underprivileged and to contempt for
the poor."
The roots of this maldistribution of things was to be found
in an imbalance of interests and ideas that was found to be
growing rapidly around the world, as much in collectivized
economies as in decentralized ones. "Many people, especially
in economically advanced societies, seem to be dominated by
economics; almost all their personal and social lives are
permeated with a kind of economic mentality."
It was precisely this sort of imbalance -- between practical
effectiveness and moral conscience, between specialization
and the whole being, between social activity and individual
reflection -- that the church existed to redress: that was
the message of Gaudium et Spes. And in fact, the church in the Iron Curtain countries gained strength
from the proceedings of Vatican Council II.
That was not the only thing going on in the 1970s, of course.
Timothy Ryback argued in Rock
Around the Bloc that rock-and-roll undermined communism,
and there is a certain amount of truth in that. But no tour
by the Rolling Stones, any more than a last-minute meeting
with Gorbachev, could have achieved a peaceful end of the
communist empire, if the argument for its dissolution hadn't
been made, subtly and quietly, years in advance.
What struck me most forcefully as I read the chapter on economic
and social life, however, was its equal applicability to the
other monopoly -- the market-oriented mentality that dominates
most nations around the world today. I was immediately
reminded of the old East-bloc joke -- under capitalism, life
is a matter of dog-eat-dog; under communism, it is just the
reverse.
Today, many economists think they have all the answers.
They are planning to take on psychology next. You can expect
salvo after salvo of exaggerated discoveries and pronouncements
in the coming years. George Stigler used to joke that
he looked forward to the day when, chemistry and physics and
medicine having solved their mysteries, only two Nobel Prizes
besides the Peace Prize would remain: one for economics,
the other for fiction.
And of course it is true that we take a good deal of out
moral instruction these days from fiction: from novels,
films, sitcoms, comic books. But secular storytelling is only
one way of addressing infinitely complicated questions of
right and wrong -- and often not the most profound.
The life of John Paul II showed that the religions of the
world -- from their most humble priestly functions to their
highest offices -- still possess remarkable vitality and power
to affirm and to negate. Sometimes that power was no
more complicated than the pope's knack for drawing a large
crowd.
John Paul II's first visit as pope to Poland came in 1979,
not long after he was invested. He was greeted, as Applebaum
recalled in her Post column, "not by a handful of little old
ladies, as the country's leaders had predicted, but by millions
of people of all ages."
That was the trip, she wrote, on which the pope kept repeating,
"Don't be afraid." It was only a year later that the
Poles organized Solidarity -- the first mass anticommunist
political movement, as effective in its time as Gandhi's Salt
March in 1930, or Martin Luther King's sit-ins and marches
in the 1960s.
Never mind politicians who seek to misappropriate religious
doctrines for their own selfish purposes. True religious leaders
of all faiths, far away and close to home, have much to teach
about an alternative way of thinking about the world -- far
more than is commonly suspected.