Research On Religion » papal infallibility

Ken Kollman on Church Centralization

tonygill — Sun, 01 Feb 2015 09:00:20 +0000

Why do institutions that begin as federations, with power located in (semi-)autonomous units, have a tendency to concentrate power in a central executive authority over time? Prof. Ken Kollman, professor of political science at the University of Michigan and author of Perils of Centralization, discusses his theory of institutional centralization, which he has applied to such entities as the United States, the European Union, and General Motors. For our purposes, though, we concentrate on his theory’s application to the Roman Catholic Church over the past century and a half.

Our conversation begins with a discussion of how Prof. Kollman became interested in this project and how it came to include the Catholic Church as an important case study. He mentions having examined a number of different cases including the Roman Empire and the Iroquois Nation, but explains how he came to concentrate on the US, EU, GM, and the Catholic Church. Tony praises Ken’s examination of the Catholic Church using the tools of political science given that few scholars apply those theoretical and conceptual tools to one of the world’s oldest governing institution. We ruminate about the comparisons of apples and oranges a bit. Ken also provides a bit of a confessional background regarding his own Catholic faith and his brother’s choice to become a priest.

Ken then lays out his general theory of executive centralization. He starts with federated units and then shows how an overarching governing institution designed to coordinate some of these lower-level and autonomous units begins to build a bureaucracy, absorbs the power to define authoritative relationships and decision-making, and then amasses resources that makes it difficult to wrest authority back from this central executive. Ken leads us through five stages of this process beginning with the assent given by the authorities at lower levels to have more decision-making occur at a higher level. This leads to a situation of representative centralization wherein local level authorities have some say in decisions at the center and the center begins to become the locus of greater decision-making. The third (and critical) phase is that of partisanship. This is not about an ideological partisanship based upon world views, but instead is a sorting out process where subunit representatives who have authority at the federal level develop a set of interests that are apart from the interests of those at the local level. Tony brings up the issue of career trajectories of individuals within organizations. As some lower-level authorities may aspire to higher-level office at some point, they have an incentive to allow greater concentration of power at the upper level. Ken agrees that this is an important part of the dynamic process. This all leads to the fourth and fifth stages of executive centralization and “lock-in,” wherein the central executive gains the ability to define the terms of authoritative relationships and through the agglomeration of resources makes it difficult for the process of centralization to be reversed. While decentralization is not impossible at this time, Ken likens the end process to gravity wherein it does take considerable effort to escape the pull. We also talk about the role that various crises play in catalyzing this process.

We then turn to the case of the Roman Catholic Church. Tony notes how well Ken’s theory fits with the Church during its first four centuries, particularly around the time of the Edict of Milan and the First Council of Nicaea. Ken mentions how Church history also shows these ebbs and flows over the course of the medieval era as well. Nonetheless, Prof. Kollman’s research attention hones in on the latter half of the 19th century forward. Following he Wars of the Italian States and the rapid decrease in secular ruling authority exercised by the Vatican, we follow how ecclesiastical authority is increasingly centralized in the papacy and Curia. Ken points out the critical importance of Vatican Council I and how the need to come to terms with increasing modernization and liberal political tendencies in Europe led to more authority being invested in the Curia. Not surprisingly, this is the era where papal infallibility is promoted as an idea of governance. We move throughout history and examine whether Vatican Council II represented a reversal of papal authority. While in many ways an opening to the modern world, we learn that although John XXIII may have been favorable to decentralization within the Church, Paul VI came under pressure from a series of conservative bishops to preserve the central authority of the papacy. This fits well with the notion of “partisanship” and the career interests of those who have risen in the ranks of the religious hierarchy.

We finish off with some thoughts about whether, and how, decentralization might take place. Tony brings up various movements such as Opus Dei and liberation theology that appear to seek greater autonomy at local levels. He also details the story of Leonardo Boff, a Brazilian theologian who was censured by the Vatican for his radical views on church decentralization. Ken ruminates about the possibility that Pope Francis will change the direction of institutional centralization. While pointing out that Francis has been trying to clean up some problems within the Curia, he does not expect to see much of a decentralization of authority any time soon. Recorded: January 21, 2015.

James Felak on Vatican Council II

tonygill — Mon, 31 Dec 2012 09:00:13 +0000

In October of 1962, several thousand cardinals, bishops and other dignitaries met at the Vatican to initiate what would become a three year “meeting of minds” that became known as The Second Vatican Council (a.k.a., Vatican Council II or Vatican II). To celebrate the 50th anniversary of the beginning of this momentous gathering, we invite back our favorite historian of modern Catholicism, James Felak, professor of history at the University of Washington. James guides us through a brief history of Christian/Catholic councils dating back to the First Council of Nicaea. All told, there have been 21 general (major) councils. We talk about their general purpose and also note how there was a roughly 300 year gap in major councils before Vatican Council I was called 1868. We review what happened at The First Vatican Council as a way of setting the table for the second one, which was to follow a century later. Prof. Felak lays out the historical context of the mid-19th century that helped to motivate Vatican I, as well as the main issues that were debated and decided at that council, including papal infallibility and the role and autonomy of the bishops. Interestingly, the specific role of the bishops and collegiality was never fully resolved, something that had an impact on Vatican II. We then catapult ourselves into the 20th century to discuss the motivations behind the convening of VCII. James points out, contrary to some popular opinion, that the Catholic Church was not in crisis during the mid-1990s and “crisis” was not a motivating factor behind this council. Although VCII is most associated with John XXIII, James notes that Pope Pius XII was making plans for a general council to reaffirm what was decided at Vatican I. With Pius’s death, though, things change and Prof. Felak nicely summarizes the differences between these two popes and how this shapes what would become VCII. He notes that some of the changes that would occur within the liturgy began with Pius XII, contrary to his image as being more conservative pontiff. Likewise, John XXIII was not as theologically liberal as many people now assume; he just liked to hug people in public, which seems somewhat liberal. Interestingly, we learn that John XXIII was considered to be a “caretaker” pontiff, something that is not uncommon within Catholic history; given John XXIII’s age it was assumed that he would maintain the status of the Church while considerations would be given to who the next pope would be. But lo and behold, John XXIII, who was not likely in on Pius XII’s plans, suprisingly calls a council in 1959. This propels Tony into a little bit of mathematical calculation, noting that there is a 3 1/2 year gap between when Vacican II is announced and when it actually convenes. This generates a discussion about the logistics for such a large event. James fills us in on how decisions were made about who to invite, how much of the council would be open to the general public (via modern media) and other faiths, and who will be setting the intellectual underpinnings of the meeting itself. We even discuss the critical issue of how to house all these people, including members of the media and observers from other faiths who were invited as a means of opening a dialogue about ecumenism. After soliciting opinions about what should be discussed, we discover that the agenda starts to spiral in all different directions, which gives rise to the council’s three-year duration. We start that discussion by noting what was not talked about at the conclave, including birth control, clerical celibacy, and the role of the Curia. James then goes into the wide range of issues that were addressed and brings up the various important documents such as Dignitatis Humanae, Gaudium et Spes and Lumen Gentium. We also chat about the politicking that went on behind the scenes, how media leaks influenced the conference, and what role the US government might have tried to play during the proceedings. In the last 20 minutes of the interview, James discusses the impact that Vatican II has had on the Catholic Church since the 1960s and emphasizes the “spirit of Vatican II” and the tension of getting back to basics (ressourcement) and growing organically with a changing world (aggiornamento). Tony shares his experiences with the folk Mass that he remembers from his childhood. James then disavows some of his misplaced notions about how John Paul II has tried to reverse the reforms of Vatican II; just as John XXIII was not as liberal as popular media portrays him, neither was John Paul II the conservative that he is often made out to be. We finish with Prof. Felak’s thoughts about where the Catholic Church is heading over the next several years. Recorded: December 18, 2012.