Thoughts
on Pope Benedict
By Steven
Shea
Two
years ago, when this author last appeared in these pages, I wrote that Cardinal
Joseph Ratzinger was Òprobably too old and controversialÓ to be elected
pope. I was wrong. I, like most Vatican watchers, thought
the papal conclave of April 2005 would be a long, complicated affair. Instead it was short and simple. It came down to a contest between
Ratzinger, the longtime champion of the conservative wing of the Roman Catholic
ChurchÕs College of Cardinals, and Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini, longtime champion
of the progressive wing. Since the
conservative Pope John Paul II appointed many more conservatives than
progressives to the College of Cardinals, Ratzinger won. I tip my hat to Fr. Richard McBrien of
Notre Dame University. He
predicted that the new pope would be one of the older cardinals. It is a tradition in the Catholic
Church to name an old man pope after the long reign of a previous one. I thought that logic would not hold in
the 2005 conclave. After the long
physical decline of John Paul II, I incorrectly thought the College of
Cardinals would not want to risk repeating such a sad spectacle anytime
soon. The College of Cardinals
were willing to take the risk.
The
first decision any pope makes is the choice of papal name. It usually is an indication of what
kind of papacy the new pontiff intends.
RatzingerÕs choice of Benedict XVI was a surprising one. The last pope with that name, Pope
Benedict XV, who reigned from 1914-1922, is remembered for two things. First, he ended the heresy hunting
campaign of his immediate predecessor, Pope Pius X. Second, he tried, and sadly failed, to bring peace during
the First World War. RatzingerÕs
choice of name is particularly ironic since he was the head heresy hunter under
John Paul II. As the head of The
Congregation for Doctrine of the Faith, previously known as The Holy Office and
before that as The Inquisition, Ratzinger became the most powerful and feared
member of the College of Cardinals.
Indeed the German heresy hunter, and former soldier of the Third Reich,
was nicknamed ÒHerr Panzer KardinalÓ for his tendency to run over progressive
theologians like a tank.
Incredibly, one of the first gestures made by Benedict XVI was to invite
his former colleague and nemesis Fr. Hans Kung, the most famous progressive
theologian of the last forty years and the first theologian disciplined by John
Paul II, to the Vatican for a meeting.
This was a signal that Benedict XVI would be a little different than
Cardinal Ratzinger.
Benedict
XVI has said he chose his name to salute St. Benedict, the patron saint of
Europe. During the long
deathwatch for John Paul II most of the TV talking heads made inane comments on
his papacy. One of the more
thoughtful comments came from papal biographer and legendary Watergate reporter
Carl Bernstein. He noted that
after Napoleon was defeated at Waterloo in 1815, Europe underwent a religious
revival. The Catholic Church was
renewed by a huge spurt of vocations to the priesthood and religious life. Bernstein said John Paul II expected
the same thing to happen when the Soviet bloc collapsed midway through his
papacy. When it did not, he was
bitterly disappointed.
More recently, the Vatican lobbied the European Union very hard to
explicitly mention EuropeÕs Christian heritage in its new constitution. The more secularly minded constitution
framers rejected the idea.
Nonetheless, Benedict has made it clear he still has not given up on a
religious revival in Europe. The
election of Benedict XVI then is a very backward looking choice. As the first pope of the new
millennium, he carries huge symbolic importance. I thought the new pope would be a vigorous, younger man from
the Third World, where the future of the church lies in the centuries to
come. Instead it is an older man
from the First World. The
hierarchs of the Catholic Church have not given up on its primary home of the
previous thousand years.
Previously
I also wrote that John Paul IIÕs primary contribution to the papal profile is
media skills. His outstanding
media presence in the age of cable news networks made him a superstar and even
carried him through his last years when his body failed him. Benedict XVI does not have the media
skills of his predecessor, and wisely he does not pretend that he does. He makes only a fraction of the public
appearances of his predecessor.
Indeed, for those who found the cult of celebrity surrounding John Paul
II tiresome, Benedict XVI is a breath of fresh air. Still, he has paid the price at least once for a lack of
media savvy. His choice of a
pejorative quote about Islam from a Byzantine Emperor in a speech during his
trip to Germany created a firestorm in the Muslim world. It was precisely this kind of misstep
that John Paul II did not make.
Nonetheless, Benedict XVI looks like a quick learner. His subsequent trip to Turkey, his
first to an Islamic nation, was a success full of diplomatic gestures.
Many
Catholic progressives feared and many conservative Catholics hoped there would
be a purge of liberal Catholics under Benedict XVI. That hasnÕt happened.
Fr. Richard John Neuhaus, editor of First Things magazine, the de facto voice of conservative American
Catholics, has already called Benedict XVI a disappointment. Even on the child sex abuse issue,
where John Paul II had a dismal record, the new pope has shown some
prudence. Last year he
disciplined Fr. Marcial Maciel Degollado, founder of the ultra-conservative
order of priests The Legionaries of Christ. Former seminarians had long accused him of sexual
abuse. John Paul II had protected
him, but under Benedict an investigation was reopened. To the surprise of many, Maciel
Degollado was removed from ministry.
Still,
it would be a huge mistake to think Benedict XVI is a moderate. Like John Paul II, he appoints
conservative bishops. There will
be no progressive reforms of the church during this papacy. Indeed his next major move will
be to widen the use of the Latin Mass, something dear to the hearts of Catholic
reactionaries.
Over
the last thirty years the prevailing direction among the worldÕs religions has
been conservative to fundamentalist.
Islam, Judaism, Hinduism and all the major branches of Christianity have
been swept up in this trend.
Religious scholars who study this phenomenon say it is a spiritual
reaction to the dizzying pace of technological and cultural change in
contemporary society. There is no
reason to believe it will end anytime soon.
Steven
Shea is a freelance writer from Milwaukee. He is a graduate of Costa Catholic and GHS. He
has a M.A. in Modern European History from Marquette University.