Pope Celebrity I?

Pope John Paul II is an unlikely celebrity. He’s old. At 82, he’s way beyond celebrity demographics. Worse, he admits it. No one will ever accuse him of having “great hair.” He hardly cuts a dashing figure. He slouches, and sometimes he slurs his speech. Real celebrities only do that after—or during—a party. JPII is a celebrity without a song, a dance, and certainly without the values-addled persona that typifies most celebrities these days.

The final kicker? He’s just not sexy.

We live in a culture which idolizes, adores, slavishly follows, even worships, celebrity-hood. Our publications and TVs are flush with them. In more ways than one.

If the pope doesn’t fit the mold, how do we explain Toronto?

At World Youth Day, hundreds of thousands of young people bestowed celebrity status on the pope. At least that’s how the secular media reported the adulation, attention and attitude of youths toward the pope during WYD 2002.

Some 1,400 archdiocesan “pilgrims” were there, as was The Catholic New World’s Chris Spoons. There’s coverage galore on this page and inside, but the celebrity angle deserves a closer look.

Cardinal George and some area young people phoned into the July 26 Catholic Community of Faith radio show Father Greg Sakowicz and I host (1-1:30 p.m. Mondays and Fridays, WSBC AM1240 and WCFJ AM1470). They told how the pope had arrived, his frail and stooped figure energized by the young crowd. And how he bantered with them, clearly enjoying the opportunity to communicate with the future of the church. And, indeed, the future of the world.

Since the media was making the celebrity comparison, I asked one of the kids if they agreed. “Was the pope, after all, a big celebrity?”

I hope the question wasn’t a career-limiting move, because Cardinal George jumped right in and said something like: “A celebrity? C’mon, Tom; we’re talking eternity here!”

Big oops.

He’s right, you know. Celebrities—at least as we define them today—are short-term wonders. Such fame is fleeting (remember, “15 minutes”). And no one, I suppose, would cast Jesus in the mold of “celebrity.” At least in current terms.

But, maybe, that’s the problem: the current definition.

Dictionaries I checked came in the way you might expect, giving such comparisons as “pop idol” and “superstar.” But we ought not let a fickle culture be the only arbiter of our language any more than we ought to let culture define our values.

At least not without a fight.

More ordinary definitions were “famous person” and “luminary” and “household word” and “public figure.”

The pope, and even Jesus, fits those.

More important, perhaps, the pope’s “celebrity” status is an opening to a necessary connection with today’s often anti-religious culture. Prophets, teachers and miracle-workers were the celebrities of Jesus’ day. With a “popular” (read: “current”) method of telling the story of the Good News to everyday, ordinary people, Jesus formed a community whose values have changed and shaped the world for the better.

So, too, does the pope, as does the church he leads.



Gratifying response

In a previous issue, we included a letter to the editor from a parish priest serving a poor and rural area of India. He pleaded for simple things: school supplies, rosaries and the like.

The letter was one of many similar ones we receive each year; far more than we can use. But we included this one to balance the bad news and negative views of so many people recently. Several calls came, asking for more information about this lone priest who wanted only to help his poor parishioners in a faraway land.

It’s gratifying to recognize that despite our recent challenges, faith lives.

Tom Sheridan
Editor and General Manager