Print   Search   Utenti   Join     Share : FaceboolTwitter
Full Version: NEWS ABOUT BENEDICT
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, [17], 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, ..., 236, 237, 238, 239, 240, 241, 242, 243, 244, 245
gracelp
Tuesday, April 11, 2006 3:32 PM
thanks for all these articles..maybe Papa is briefed beforehand on what to expect on these kinds of dialogues and questions to be asked but Papa is a pro so i think he knows how to deal with it.
mag6nideum
Tuesday, April 11, 2006 3:45 PM
RE:That dialogue
[G][/G]Thanks, dear Teresa, for the thorough answers to my questions. Yes, I was referring to the Q and A-session with the youth, which I also thought was brilliantly handled.
I was especially impressed with his handling of the question on science and faith and immediately wished it could be read in my country. Therefore my question on translation rights of specifically that dialog, or parts of it.

By the way, we had large pictures of Benedict on the editor's page within 3 days in one of the two main Afrikaans newspapers. It happens more and more frequently and I'm mentioning it because these newspapers are owned by high profile Protestants. There was a letter of complaint a few months ago -"Why all the reports on the RCC? Do you have ANY Catholic readers?". But the complaint was ignored, as can be seen. The regular acknowledgement of the RCC, and especially this pope, is truly a step forward in the history of ecumeunism in the public sphere in our country, I'm happy to say.
TERESA BENEDETTA
Tuesday, April 11, 2006 10:01 PM
RATZINGER'S 'SILENT REVOLUTION'
DEAR MAG6 - Happy news indeed that the South African press is finding our Pope newsworthy!...So go to it, print out the translation of the dialogue, translate it (or parts of it) into Afrikaans and send it to the English and Afrikaans newspapers for their use. Just be sure to say it is an unofficial translation of the official Vatican transcript in Italian.
--------------------------------------------------------------

Meanwhile, here's a translation of a book review that appears in today's paper issue of Corriere della Sera, which Ratzi-Lella in the main forum posted earlier. Thnaks to emma for identifying the article writer for me, as I cannot access the article online.

The book under review is by Alberto Melloni, who often writes for Corriere himself to analyze events that have to do with the papacy and with the Church in general. He is what one would consider a progressivist, and in fact is a prominent member of the so-called Bologna School, which advocates the progressives' view of Vatican-II (which is not the view of Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI!).

---------------------------------------------------------------


From Wojtyla to Ratzinger: The silent revolution
Moderate style, more collegiality -
How Benedict XVI stands out from his predecessor

By Sergio Romano

In the story of the Roman Church there is an interesting personage, not strictly institutional, who takes on considerable importance at certain moments. He is the preacher of the Pontifical household. I am not thinking of the great medieval orators who were in any case also the leaders of the Christian movements of their time.

I am thinking of the court preachers, who imparted advanced lessons in theology and church politics to the sovereign, his family and the politico-administrative leadrs of the State, especially during Holy Week.

One of the most famous, in the second part of the 19th century, was the Sicilian priest Gioacchino Ventura, exponent of a progressivist and liberal Catholicism, who became, toward the end of his life, a sort of spiritual adviser to the court of Napoleon III.

From Alberto Melloni’s new book (L’inizio di papa Ratzinger , Einaudi), I learn that even the Papal court, i.e., the Curia, has its preacher. At present it is the Franciscan priest Raniero Cantalamessa (a leading figure in the movement called ‘Renewal of the spirit’), who was tasked with preaching a 'meditation for the cardinals’ before the meetings that preceded the actual Conclave after the death of John Paul II.

To judge from the pages which Melloni dedicates to this episode, the “meditation,” generally ignored by the media, even those that specialize in the Vatican, was not a conventional sermon marked by religious piety and ecclesiastical rhetoric.

The court preacher does not have powers, he does not direct any congregation, he doesn’t govern a dicastery, and has an inferior rank compared to his audience. But he can suggest what the layman whould call a line or a strategy.

Cantalamessa began by giving the cardinals a lesson in humility by telling them: God has already elected Papa Wojtyla’s successor; your task is not to choose the new Pope but “to make God's choice emerge". After this premise, the preacher indicaed some themes which, in his judgment, should dominate the agenda for the Conclave.

I will try to summarize some of these themes, with some personal interpretation, even if I fear that my take will be necessarily worldly and will not reflect all the spiritual importance of the ‘meditation.”

1) The Church should be an exemplary minority.
It is right that it fights laws which endanger its principles with regard to some important questions in our time (divorce, abortion, euthanasia, genetic manipulation). But it is even more important that it offers the world the example of an alternative society in which the truths of the Church are lived and practiced by the body of the faithful.

If I understand correctly, these words mean that actual example, shown consistently to the world, is better than some public interventions of the Church such as those, for instance, that Cardinal Ruini has made.
[Is the writer saying that, at least in Italy, the vast majority of Catholics get divorced, pratise abortion, support euthanasia and genetic manipulation? In the world of 1.1 billion Catholics, they don't. That's an example!]

2) It is necessary that the new Pope does not try to imitate his predecessor.
It is a sensible suggestion behind which, nevertheless, one senses a reservation about the style of a Pope who neglected the Roman Curia and became, according to an irreverent definition, “a globetrotter for the faith.”

3) It is also necessary to re-emphasize “the uniqueness of Christ as (the only way) to salvation”.
This is something that could be taken for granted, but the statement may also imply the reservations many Catholics had about what they thought to be John Paul II’s excessive tendencies in inter-religious dialog.

5) Finally it is necessary to return to the Church agenda the question of “collegiality in the governing of the universal Church.”
In current language, this is understood to suggest a return to the spirit of Vatican-II to give the bishops powers which the autocrats in Rome never gave up despite the stated objective of the Council.

Back to Melloni’s book. Professor of contemporary history in Modena and Reggio Emilia, member of the Foundation for Religious Sciences in Bologna (the institution founded by Giuseppe Dossett and directed by Giuseppe Alberigo*] and author of a recent much–discused essay (Mother Church, Stepmother Church, Einaudi), Melloni examines the “politics” of a Pope who should be in many ways an open book.

Few men of the Church, before becoming Pope, have ever published so many books, gave so many interviews, spoken so frequently in public (as Joseph Ratzinger). And very few (in fact, only one, if I am not mistaken) came to the Papacy after having directed the “police ministry” of the Roman Church which is the Holy Office, now called the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

Therefore, there is a very strong temptation to think that Benedict XVI would resemble Joseph Ratzinger and that the contents of his future encyclicals would necessarily all be found already in his previously published works.

But the author of this book is not convinced that is so. After reconstructing Ratzinger’s scientific development, from his university teachings to certain pronouncements of the CDF against liberation theology, Melloni gives the impression that he believes (or hopes) that this new Papacy could represent a true change or turning point (svolta).

This conviction implies an unconventional judgment on Wojtyla’s Papacy. I don’t think Melloni was happy with all the traveling, the preoccupation with media, the indifference to the workings of the Roman Curia, an autocracy founded on popularity, the “crowd of God” assembled in St. Peter’s Square after the Pope's death, nor the demonstrations for immediate sainthood poromoted by the Focolari movement.

When Melloni describes the conditions of the Church during John Paul II’s papacy, he speaks of a “suspended unity,” an expression that is not quite positive.

Could Benedict XVI open a new chapter? I cannot summarize here the part of the book in which Melloni sees in certain acts and words of Ratzinger, before and after his election to the papacy, the signs of some important ‘novelty' or change.

But I am struck by the importance that he attributes to the changes that have already been apparent in the style of the new Pope: “All the characteristics of ‘public Wojtylism’ have been abandoned without need of polemical explanation, but with a clear decisiveness that could not have pleased all those who elected Benedict. The big flirt with the public is over…Benedict XVI’s eloquence is fluidly academic, even when it is harsh; he’s almost uneasy with applause and seems unwilling to court applause by those appropriate pauses common to pontifical oratory but which is not his style at all… The pattern of trips have certainly changed… TV visibility has been toned down.”

What does Melloni expect of Ratzinger? Again, it is better to let him say it: “The man’s intellectual credibility is such that we can expect the most obvious moves: repair the damages wrought by the Wojtylian court [as in royal court]; bring not just gestures but intelligence as well to the ecumenical dilemma; and above all, reform the central institutions of the Church, especially in the synodal sense, reforms that a candidate of the Italian politicians would certainly have ignored and that a candidate of the progressives would perhaps not have dared to impose.”

Only time will tell if these predictions are realistic and well-founded, or whether they are more like “meditations for the Pope” proposed by Melloni to Wojtyla’s successor in the first months of his pontificate.


Alberto Melloni
«L’inizio di papa Ratzinger»
Einaudi, 161 pp., 9 E.
In bookstores today


----------------------------------------------------------------

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 11/04/2006 23.45]

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 12/04/2006 0.02]

Maryjos
Tuesday, April 11, 2006 11:14 PM
Books and Meditations
Thank you for translating the book reviews, Teresa.
In today's Vatican Information Service [forgive me if you've all read this], we read that this year's meditations on the Via Crucis at the Colosseum are being published and will be on sale later this week. There's to be an English translation, which it says will be available in the USA - so we could all buy it from Amazon.com The meditations have been written by Archbishop Angelo Comastri.............but the devotion is to be lead by Pope Benedict.

Love, Peace and a holy Holy Week to you all!
[DIM]15pt[=DIM][FONT]Comic Sans MS[=FONT][G]After nearly a year, we love our Papa more than ever!!!!!
THANK YOU FOR BEING YOU, DEAR PAPA BENEDETTO![/G][/FONT][/DIM]
TERESA BENEDETTA
Tuesday, April 11, 2006 11:53 PM
MaryJos- The Vatican Publishing House announced this several weeks ago. In fact, as of today, you can access the full text of Mons. Comastri's 2006 Via Crucis Meditations and Prayer on the Vatican website.

The presentation and opening prayer are on
www.vatican.va/news_services/liturgy/2006/documents/ns_lit_doc_20060414_via-crucis-present...
and the Stations of the Cross meditations themselves on
www.vatican.va/news_services/liturgy/2006/documents/ns_lit_doc_20060414_via-crucis-present...
benefan
Wednesday, April 12, 2006 4:48 PM
Total attendance breaks 1 million for Pope Benedict's audiences

Vatican, Apr. 12 (CWNews.com) - With at least 20,000 people attending the Wednesday public audience by Pope Benedict XVI on April 12, the total attendance at papal audiences during the past year has surpassed 1 million.

The prefecture of the pontifical household estimated the crowd at the Wednesday audience at 20,000. Most observers felt that estimate was extremely low, and the Vatican Information Service put the figure at 40,000.

But even the lower figure pushed total attendance at Wednesday audiences above 1 million since the start of Pope Benedict's pontificate. This was his 46th weekly audience.

After his prepared remarks, Pope Benedict spent some time greeting particular groups in attendance at the April 12 audience. He was saluted by a group of young English Catholics who sang "Happy Birthday," followed by a Polish group which sang birthday greetings in their own language. Pope Benedict will mark his 79th birthday on Easter Sunday, April 16.

Wulfrune
Wednesday, April 12, 2006 8:29 PM
Papa's Easter card
Emma3 has posted this upstairs, the first Easter Card from Benedict XVI. Wouldn't we all love to get this in our mail? And isn't it a beautiful choice? He has such taste.



He's written in Latin "non est hic, sed resurrexit" (he is not here, but risen)
and in Italian "at the solemnity of Easter, 2006"
TERESA BENEDETTA
Wednesday, April 12, 2006 9:20 PM
P.S. And the image is Fra Angelico's 'Noli me tangere' (Do not touch me) from the San Marco Museum in Florence.
loriRMFC
Wednesday, April 12, 2006 11:16 PM
Thanks to all for the many articles and congrats to Papa for breaking 1 million. A very nice Easter card as well.
gracelp
Thursday, April 13, 2006 4:32 PM
Go Papa B!!!

HAPPY EASTER to all my!!!mwah!
benefan
Thursday, April 13, 2006 5:25 PM
Pope tweaks Easter rites

Benedict drops two customs but sticks to key traditions

(ANSA) - Vatican City, April 11 - Pope Benedict, going into his first Easter as leader of the world's 1.1 billion Catholics, has done away with two of the customs which his predecessor inserted into the Vatican rites .

The German pontiff, who turns 79 on Easter Sunday, has decided against publishing a letter to priests on the Thursday before Easter and personally confessing a group of pilgrims on Good Friday.

John Paul II introduced the letter to priests early in his pontificate, using it to raise issues such as the Church's relations with women or to describe his own vocation to the priesthood.

John Paul's habit of going down into St Peter's Basilica on Good Friday to confess ten pilgrims in various languages was a popular one and produced an annual rush of Catholics wanting the attention of the special confessor .

But no such moment appears on the list of papal engagements released by the Vatican for Easter week .

Otherwise, the routine for the most important Christian feast appears to follow the customary pattern, culminating in the famous Urbi et Orbi message delivered by the pope from the central balcony of St Peter's Basilica on Sunday .

Benedict will keep up another of the most famous Easter traditions of recent years: the torchlit 'Via Crucis', or Way of the Cross, ceremony at the Colosseum on the evening of Good Friday .

On the preceding day, he will preside over the so-called Chrism mass in St Peter's Basilica in the morning and another mass in the afternoon at the Roman basilica of St John Lateran .

The second mass will include a rite involving the pope washing the feet of 12 people, a custom which recalls the Bible account of Jesus doing the same to the apostles during the Last Supper .

At 10 pm on Saturday, Benedict will preside over the Easter Vigil in St Peter's and on the following morning, Easter Day, he will lead mass for the thousands of faithful expected to gather in the square .

After the Urbi et Orbi message the pope will be whisked away by helicopter and taken to his summer residence outside Rome to spend a few days resting away from the bustle of the city .

He will appear on his balcony briefly on Monday to speak to crowds gathered in the courtyard of the Castelgandolfo residence .

Although Sunday will be Benedict's birthday and Wednesday will be the first anniversary of his election, no public celebrations or events have been announced .

benefan
Thursday, April 13, 2006 10:12 PM
Pope returns to practice of washing feet of laymen

By Cindy Wooden
Catholic News Service

ROME (CNS) -- Returning to a practice in effect before 1985, Pope Benedict XVI washed the feet of 12 laymen during the April 13 evening Mass of the Lord's Supper at Rome's Basilica of St. John Lateran.

The 12 men were chosen to represent the various lay movements and communities active in the Diocese of Rome.

From 1985 to 2001, Pope John Paul II washed the feet of 12 priests each year during the Holy Thursday Mass. Beginning in 2002, because of his weakened physical condition and his inability to walk, the pope had cardinals perform the foot-washing ritual, but always washing the feet of 12 priests.

However, in the first six years of his pontificate, Pope John Paul continued Pope Paul VI's practice of washing the feet of laypeople.

In 1974, Pope Paul washed the feet of 12 boys undergoing therapy for the effects of polio. In 1977, he washed the feet of 12 boys, ages 12-14, who were students at the Rome Diocese's minor seminary.

For several years, Pope John Paul washed the feet of elderly laymen, including a group of homeless men living at a shelter run by the Missionaries of Charity in 1980. In 1983, he washed the feet of 12 young men from Italy's Boys Town, and in 1984 the 12 were representatives of Rome parish youth groups.

TERESA BENEDETTA
Thursday, April 13, 2006 11:49 PM
HANS KUENG ON ONE YEAR OF BENEDICT XVI
This morning, both Ratzigirl and Ratzi-Lella posted on different sections of the main forum the following article in Italian as published today, 4/13/05, by the Italian newspaper La Stampa. As the published piece also carried at the end the following attribution:
© 2006 Hans Küng
The New York Times Syndicate

I first turned online to both the New York Times as well as the International Herald Tribune (of which the NYT is part, I believe) for the English version. But I've looked, and Benefan has looked, and there's nothing out there in English yet.

So here is a translation. Please pardon a few parenthetical asides I have interposed. Kueng's views are a mixed bag, colored necessarily by his own positions on much-debated aspects of Church policy. But on the whole, he credits Benedict for his mind and for 'promising signs' so far, whereas he is unfairly cutting about John Paul
.
----------------------------------------------------------------



BENEDICT XVI: SURPRISES FROM A CONSERVATIVE
One year since his election,
Ratzinger could carry out reforms
that would have been more difficult
for a progressivist Pope
By Hans Kueng

I never concealed my very strong disappointment with the Conclave which chose as Pope Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, who was head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, once known as the Inquisition. [Prof. Kueng, it was the Holy Office –the Inquisition was what the Holy Office did for a time.] Despite that, (I said then that) Benedict XVI deserved a chance. Therefore, notwithstanding my skepticism, I suspended judgment and requested a personal audience with the new Pope.

For 27 long years I had waited in vain for a reply to my letters to John Paul II, so you can imagine how surprised and happy I was when, having written to Benedict XVI on May 30, 2005, I received a friendly response from him by June 15: the new Pope was ready for a “friendly conversation” with me.

This took place on September 24 at the papal summer residence in Castel Gandolfo and lasted for 4 hours. For many persons around the world, it was a sign of hope because the two of us, despite having taken different roads and adopted different viewpoints, continued to have something decisive in common: both of us are Christians, in the service of the same Church, and despite the controversies, we respected each other.

We never even tried to hide our differences. I wanted to illustrate to him the preoccupations of a large and important part of the Catholic Church. To the letter that I sent him, I had attached my “Open letter to the cardinals” which was published shortly before the Conclave, and meant to call attention to my opinions on the future course of the Church and to draw up a comprehensive program of reform. However, it did not make sense to me to dedicate our personal conversation to the details of such reforms, seeing that I and Pope Benedict [I am truly disconcerted by this form in which the speaker/writer names himself ahead of another person] had completely different ideas about this.

Generally speaking, I was not hoping for another media Pope but for a pastoral Pope oriented towards ecumenism.

And here I see signs of hope. The new Pope is a grounded and reflective scholar, he is not constantly involved in grand public appearances, and he has reduced both trips abroad as well as the audiences in Rome.

He is the supreme Pastor who proceeds with slower, shorter steps, who takes his time, and prefers to promote small changes which will bring about greater ones
.

Brief occasions of free discussion during the last Bishops Synod and his invitation to the cardinals to express themselves freely have offered at the very least an opening to collegiality. In short, Benedict is a conservative with some measure of openness. But he is not the rigid type of conservative and so he could have a few surprises for the world, as he did when he quickly agreed to meet with me.

I know that many observers are skeptical about this Pontificate and ask: “Can a leopard change his spots?” I remain a realist, but I do not want to give up hope. Things rarely go as one expects them to, but it is equally rare that things turn out as bad as one feared.

So, where is Benedict XVI bringing the Church? The question has political importance in the world, not only for Catholics and other Christians, but also for people of other faiths, and for the secular men and women who are active in politics, ecomonics and the academic world.

After all, with its billion or more members, active or nominal, the Catholic Church is the largest multinational religious body in the world, with an internal organization cohesive enough to make it an effective global protagonist despite its many weaknesses. Heads of state and government from all over the world gathered at St. Peter’s for the funeral rites of John Paul II – they did not do so only out of devotion.

Almost independent of his person, the Pope is a spiritual force, and for many young people as well as older ones, he is a credible moral figure that they can identify with. That is why the direction to be taken by the Church has global importance, and the questions that I and Benedict discussed in Castel Gandolfo were global in nature. In particular, they had to do with three problem areas within which I expect some progress to be made under this new Papacy.

Above all, there is the relation between the Christian faith and science (and all otherr disciplines in general). The reasonableness of the faith was always important to Ratzinger as a theologian, and in the joint communique which followed our meeting, the Pope “shared the preoccupation of Professor Kueng on the need to re-start the dialog between faith and science.”

I do not know the scope of this sharing. Is it limited to physical, biological and theological questions on the origins of the cosmos, of life and of humanity, or can it be extended to a rational discussion on issues of biology and medicine, such as embryo research, birth control and artificial insemination? [I am surprised Prof Kueng uses this limited and rather outdated term for assisted reproduction.]

Next, we discussed the dialog among religions. Benedict has expressed himself on several occasions against the idea of “a clash of civilizations.” Moreover, he is convinced that there can be no peace among nations without peace among religions, and no peace among the latter unless they talk to each other. That is why in the press statement, I was able to express my “approval for the Pope’s interest in a dialog among religions as well as among various social groups in the modern world.” [Aren’t we supposed to be in the post-modern era now?]

But even on this matter, a question remains for me: given the defects of Christianity and the positive traits in other faiths [this formulation appears to reserve all the defects for Christianity and all the positive traits for other faiths], will this Pope be capable of reconciling the conviction of truth in his own faith with that of the truths professed by other faiths? [Prof Kueng, how do you reconcile to Christian belief Islam’s apparent justification of murder in the name of their religion or its blatant intolerance of any other religion but Islam? Do you have any concrete suggestions about this?]

Third and last point: we spoke of the importance of a shared human ethic. Benedict understands that “the global ethic project [Kueng’s particular ‘apostolate’ in recent years] is not an intellectual concept” but rather something that seeks to bring to light “the moral values about which the great religions of the world converge despite all their differences. With this wealth of principles, these religions should be capable of providing valid criteria even for secular minds.”

But here too, another question presents itself: At the next inter-religious meeting, whether at Assisi or elsewhere, will there be prayers only, or will it be possible to define these shared ethical standards?

Naturally, I did not harbor any illusions of an agreement between Benedict and myself. By common accord, we focused on policy questions outside the Church, merely touching on “internal” policy in passing. But the Catholic Church finds itself in such a serious crisis rooted in “internal” questions that no Pope can reasonably think of setting these questions aside indefinitely.


Benedict must choose between an eventual retreat to the pre-modern, pre-Reformation world of the Middle Ages, or a forward-looking long view which will take the Church into the post-modern universe that the rest of the world entered for quite some time.

The Pope may decide on retreat, but I don’t believe he will. He may decide to stand firm right where the Church is now, but to be limited merely to celebrating the Papacy instead of helping the Church in its present needs would be tantamount to taking a step backwards.

Or he may decide to go forward – and this is what I and countless other persons within and outside the Catholic Church wish that he would do. The Pope knows that the situation of the Church is serious. John Paul II failed to convert many persons to his rigorous viewpoints, especially in matters of sexual morality, despite all his speeches and his travels. Such viewpoints have been rejected by a crushing majority of Catholics and national parliaments, even in his native Poland. All his encyclicals and his catechism, his decrees and his disciplinary sacntions, all the pressures from the Vatican, plain or hidden, on those who opposed him, resulted in practically nothing.

Maybe Benedict perceives that the campaign to re-evangelize Europe revived fears of spiritual imperialism from Rome and contributed to the rejection of even a mention of God and Christianity in the preamble to the European Constitution. [Oh, that is taking a deliberately skewed view of the reason for the 'rejection' - it wasn't fear of Rome as much as contempt for the very idea of God!] The oceanic Masses by the previous Pope, though they were very well-organized and effective as media events, failed to hide the fact that things are not going well for the Church.

There is a profound difference between what the hierarchy commands [is it the hierarchy, or the word of God, that demands compliance with the basic tenets of the faith?] and that which the members of the Church truly believe, a difference that is reflected in the way they live.

[This may be so in the industrialized nations where public opinion polls tend to survey only vocal militants, and where many nominal Catholics have set their own personal beliefs as their conscience, rather than “ethical truths the whole world can share”, as Prof Kueng himself is advocating. But how can one make this generalization and speak for the hundreds of millions of Catholics in the Third World of ‘simple’ but not ‘little’ faith who believe what they are taught in catechism and religious instruction before they are even baptized?]

Attendance at Church is in decline, and likewise religious marriages. Confession has practically disappeared in most of the Western nations. The ranks of the priesthood are thinning and there are not enough replacements, partly because the credibility of priests has been badly shaken by the pedophile scandals in the United States and Ireland, and have now extended also to Austria and Poland.

For as long as the absolute primacy of Rome prevails, the Pope will have most of Christianity against him. [Wow! What a sweeping statement!] Only if he embraces the model of John XXIII and seeks to practice a pastoral primacy of service, renewed in the light of the Gospel and commitment to liberty, can the Pope guarantee openness within the Church and become a moral compass for the world. [Is he saying that Paul VI, John Paul II and now Benedict XVI, are not the moral compass? How were the two succeeding papacies, in terms of pastoral service, any less than John XXIII's?]

If Benedict XVI is able to lead the Church out of this crisis of trust and hope, then he will bring what Karl Rahner called “the church of winter” to a new spring. He knows the Curia and the bishops more than anybody else, and unlike his predecessor is also a good administrator and an able scholar. [Kueng’s constant putdown of John Paul reflects his obvious prejudice, but since he well knows that Ratzinger was at the very least John Paul’s co-theoretician of doctrine and policy, all his criticism of John Paul is also a criticism of Ratzinger.]

One of his rivals at the Conclave told me that if he wants to, Benedict could realize the reforms that a more progressivist Pope would find it difficult to carry out. [Why exactly?]

So many persons within and outside the Catholic Church are waiting for an end to the quarter-century stalemate in Church reforms. It is their desire that the long-term structural problems of the Church may be discussed openly so that solutions may be found, whether such solutions are carried out by the Pope himself or by the Bishops Synod or by a Third Vatican Council.


© 2006 Hans Küng
The New York Times Syndicate

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 14/04/2006 1.22]

TERESA BENEDETTA
Friday, April 14, 2006 5:20 AM
THE POPE OF LOVE AND JOY

Here is a translation of the lead article in the FAMIGLIA CRISTIANA special issue to mark the first year of Pope Benedict XVI's pontificate. It is an interview conducted by Alberto Dobbio with Cardinal Camillo Ruini.
----------------------------------------------------------------

”Benedict XVI is a great theologian and he certainly has not been deprived of this great talent in his exercise of the Petrine ministry. On the contrary, it is his individual charism. But this has not kept him either from communicating with simplicity and spontaneity.”

Cardinal Camillo Ruini, the Pope’s vicar for the Diocese of Rome and president of the Italian bishops conference, reviews a year of the Pontificate and describes a man, Joseph Ratzinger, who put a stamp on his Pontificate with the first words he pronounced as Pope on the Loggia of Benedictions one year ago on April 19, when he described himself as "a humble worker in the vineyard of the Lord."

Eminence, why did those words surprise the world?
Because they showed his simplicity, his goodness, which perhaps many do not know. And that smile, his joy! He has spoken many times about joy. If I have to say one thing that this first year of his Pontificate has meant, I would say joy and the centrality of love, with which he has already left a profound track in the life of the Church and has called the attention of the world. It offers us a key to his Pontificate.



Benedict XVI has replaced the tiara with the bishop’s miter in his coat of arms. Besides that, he has also emphasized rather forcefully his role as Bishop of Rome, as travelling companion with the bishops and priests, of all the people of God. What kind of a man is Papa Ratzinger?
He is a very simple man, who is close to everyone. He has never liked to emphaisze his personality, which was always an important one. But I would say that he is averse to getting too much attention.

Is it right to say that in this Pontificate, the words of the Pope will count more than his pictures?
Yes, words and the ideas that are behind these words are of great importance. But he is a theologian who knows how to communicate with simplicity and spontaneity.

At St. Peter’s Square, he responded very effectviely to basic questions from the youth about faith, vocation, culture. But he did not deliver an address. Do you think this is also another mark of his Papacy?
It is a choice that Benedict XVI has adopted in certain situations. He did it with the priests in Val D’Aosta, with the parish priests of Rome, with children last autumn. He did the same with the youth. He is able to directly confront difficult questions, using simple words to answer profound questions. We bishops and cardinals experienced that during the Synod and the Consistory, on that day of reflection on the problems of the Church. The Pope succeeds in getting directly to the heart of a problem.

What are the great questions that remain open in this pontificate, and what are the common threads that one can trace through the course of the past year?
The Pope has focused on the central problem which is the situation of the Christian faith in our time. He has been calling on the faithful to expand the areas of their own reasoning in order to be witnesses of God’s love. According to the Pope, this is the key through which Christianity may interact with the culture of today. I would add that he has done so in a very modern way, because in all his interventions, he has always given a big role to each man’s individual liberty. He has always said that in the end, adhering to Christianity is a choice to be made by man, a reasonable, well-founded choice, but a choice nevertheless that is up to man’s free will. He offers reason as a means to embrace faith.

The Pope has insisted on the public dimension of the faith. He has said many times that is very concerned about a world which goes on as if God does not exist. Do you see in this, Eminence, a continuity between the pontificate of Benedict XVI with that of John Paul II?
Certainly, this was a great concern for Papa Wojtyla. I can attest to that personally. And it is true, even in this matter, there is continuity. I would say a continuity of mission. John Paul II often invoked the public dimension of the faith. In the first years of his Pontificate, he did so several times in talking about the nations of Eastern Europe, especially his own Poland. Now that the world has changed, Benedict XVI is more concerned abiut Western culture, which is pervaded with secularism, that is the idea that one can proceed to construct public spaces – namely, society, states, consensus among nations, human rights – leaving God aside. That God is only a private matter for individual consciences. That you cannot even mention his name a public because He is a purely private matter.

Many would call it tolerance
And the Pope, rightly, explains that is is a false tolerance. He has repeated it several time sduring this first year. If we do not acknowledge a public space for religion, then we deprive social life of one of its fundamental components, whose contribution to the maintenance of society itself is essential.

Benedict XVI, speaking to the youth, called this “God’s revolution.” Don’t you think he used a word that, in the opinion of many, is too daunting?
No, the youth understood. This is the fuindamental concept that the Pope developed in Cologne. At that WYD, the Pope wagered on introducing Eucharistic Adoration. It wasn’t easy to propose adoration of the Most Holy Sacrament up on the altar to a million persons on a vast field. But his wager succeeded. I can testify that even in that context, the youth who were present prayed as they should.

But why a revolution?
Jesus, in the last supper, anticipates the Cross and his passion. He accepts it with love, he does not step back, he follows it to the end. When you propose such a demanding and revolutionary message to the youth, something that can change life and history, you are challenging and encouraging them at the same time that you gratify them. That is what the Pope did in Cologne. Young people, although perhaps in a confused utopian way, believe in the power of love to change the world. More than adults, definitely. And the Pope put his bet on them and challenged the new generation with a task: “You yourselves must change in order to change history.” That’s not a small thing to ask.

In the encyclical Deus caritas est, he takes up the concept again. Many were surprised that Ratzinger, guardian of the faith, dedicated his first encyclical to love. What did you think?
The first part is profoundly doctrinal. It explains what is faith and what it should not be, what is Christianity, how one must believe in God’s love, how one can respond to this love. But why the surprise? The theme of love is central in Joseph Ratzinger’s biography. Concretely, the Pope answered Nietszche’s accusation that Christianity poisons the joy in love. There are many people in our society today who think so, even if they are not even aware of Nietszche. And the Pope chose with this encyclical to explain why that accusation is wrong, because Christianity is not an ornament, either in the public life or in private.

Another favorite theme is his insistence on Sacred Scripture. Even in his visits to two parishes in Rome, he gave homilies based on readings for the day. Is that the mark of a new style?
Benedict XVI is a theologian who is deeply Biblical and rooted in liturgical sources. This is a mark of his papacy. The fact that he gave the Bible as a gift to the young people assembled in St. Peter’s Square for WYD this year is a road marker, more than a sign. And it is an invitation to the priests in every parish to do the same. We should go back to explaining the word of God.

The Pope and Italy – what was the relationship this year?
I remember his visit to the Basilica of St. Paul a few days after the election. The people there were the people of Rome, who represent the people of Italy, not large organized groups of pilgrims. The enthusiasm was overwhelming, spontaneous. Nationality is no longer in question for a Pope, at least not after Karol Wojtyla’s Pontificate. Let us also remember Benedict’s concern for Italy as a nation – for example, in his address to the Bishops' assembly on May 30 in Bari, and a the Quirinale, when he visited President Ciampi.

We know he is going to Verona for the convention of the Italian Church. Last week he told the youth in St. Peter’s Square that it was necessary to construct oases of Catholic culture: do these words signify an appreciation of the cultural project of the Church in Italy?
Without a doubt. We trust that the Pope will come to Verona in the fall. He has a great interest in the cultural project. This idea grew under John Paul’s magisterium., in which Cardinal Ratzinger had a very important role. Basically, it is the same problem posed by the Council: to evangelize the culture of our time. On this question - and not only during the first year of his ponitifcate - Joseph Ratzinger has devoted much effort. One needs to re-read his addresses on Europe and its Christian roots, not forgetting that lecture given in Subiaco last year, a day before John Paul II’s death. It is the most eloquent sign of how central the Pope considers the exercise and the social role of an intelligence illumined by faith.

Eminence, you have met with him several times this year. What kind of a man is Papa Ratzinger?
When you meet with him, he is a direct, immediate style. He responds directly to questions without going around them, and in a very precise way. This is a great advantage, even for governing the Church.

When did you meet him for the first time?
So many years ago in Reggia Emilia. I was chairman of the theological institute. It was April 19, 1971, exactly 34 years before he would be elected Pope. I invited him for a lecture and a Mass with the seminarians and for a public lecture as well. I remember that he asked me to accompany him to Canossa [where Henry IV came to do penance before Pope Leo VII], a place that is evocative for both Europe and the Church. Some friends in Reggio Emilia have unearthed photographs of that day. I gave them to him shortly after he was elected. He did not forget.

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 14/04/2006 5.57]

TERESA BENEDETTA
Friday, April 14, 2006 8:06 AM
CRITICIZING WITH LOVE
This is another article from the FAMIGLIA CRISTIANA special issue to mark the first year of Benedict XVI's pontificate. It is written by Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, Archbishop of Genova, and one of the Pope's closest friendds among the cardinals. Not only did they work together at the CDF, they also lived in the same apartment building during all the years Bertone was in Rome. Here is a translation -
----------------------------------------------------------------

THE SINCERE KINDNESS OF
AN EXPERT IN HUMANITY

Ratzinger as Prefect of the CDF:
“If he had to correct someone, he did so with love”
By Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone

I have the most beautiful memories of working with Cardinal Ratzinger and with John Paul II, from the time when I was a consultant to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in the 80s, before becoming secretary of that dicastery.

Unforgettable memories of the cordiality, sometimes even of the ‘impetuousness’ of the strong personality of John Paul II. I remember the power of his voice, his testimony for the centrality of Christ in human history. At the same time, I have in mind the doctrinal clarity of Cardinal Ratzinger, the total trust that linked John Paul II to the cardinal.

My experience of working with the two Popes, in different roles, has been for me a school of life, a school of faith, a school of spirituality.

I would like to underscore the ability of the man Joseph Ratzinger to create friendship, brotherhood, cordiality, even with those who worked with him routinely.



Let us imagine Fridays, the “Congress” we called it, the weekly meeting of the CDF in Rome. Every question on which an opinion has been requested is first subjected to a study in depth by competent officails in the particular sector concerned, and this study is now presented to all the other sectors. The Cardinal Prefect asks each one’s opinion and listens to everyone attentively.

With what delicate sensibility this expert theologian would listen even to the youngest in the group! What a sign of his inner freedom that he did not hesitate to choose - if that was his conclusive opinion - an element proposed even by members who had just joined the congregation!

He had this great ability to listen and to value everyone, according to the medieval adage that the truth, whoever says it, ultimately comes from the Holy Spirit.

Some people, after the Conclave, were frightened at the idea that Peter’s Chair would be occupied by some kind of frowning censor, a cold-hearted professor who would hardly be understanding.

But those fears have been swept away by the light that his epxressive eyes communicate, by the kindness with which he stops to greet pilgrims during his audiences.

For me, it was not a new discovery, and I would like to recount one of his work habits at the Congregation which is very relevant. There are so many requests that reach the Palazzo Sant’Uffizio, and often, service to truth requires that one must say certain clarificatory words to avoid any misunderstanding, to prevent lending a hand to diminution or misrepresentation of what the Bible says.

Once we have a consensus of opinion in the CDF and the question has been presented to the Holy Father, we may then have to intervene with a formal declaration to the bishop or theologian concerned. A letter is prepared in which the correct position is presented, along with proposed suggestions or any disciplinary provisions that may be required to resolve a question. The letter goes to the desk of the Prefect, after which it goes back to the appropriate official for the definitive draft. On the margins of these letters, we would often see his note: “Soften it.” (Soavizzare!)

I learned and have explained so many times to other co-workers the sense of this verb: it indicated that one should use a loving attitude toward a bishop who may have turned to the CDF because of a doubt of conscience or a suffering spirit, often in the midst of so much pastoral work; or that one should show respect for those who, no matter how mistaken, have committed much of their energy in trying to explain and deepen their knowledge of Christian truth.

Ratzinger, the theologian, professor and bishop, therefore felt kinship with the theologians, professors and bishops to whom these letters were addressed. He always had respect for the man, who is always bigger than any of his actions, even if he is wrong: a principle dear to John XXIII - persecute the error but love the one who errs.

Along this line, I would like to recall a significant gesture by the Pope at the start of his pontificate: his invitation to Hans Kueng, who, despite their university collaboration at the start of their respective professorships, he had not spared from dutiful reprimands and precise criticism.

A cardinal who went to one of the restaurants in the Castelli Romani area for lunch recognized the face of the famous professor who was seated at the next table, but he hesitated to greet him because he thought his presence in Rome was improbable, not long after the election as Pope of his “theological adversary.”

Well, this cardinal confided to me, "you can imagine my amazement to learn, after having decided to observe good manners and go up to him, I asked after greeting him what was the reason for his visit to the Eternal City, and I heard him say that he was there at the personal invitation of the Pope to come to dinner."

We have a Pope who is among the most theologically prepared but also most definitely an expert in humanity, to use a term which Paul VI – who made him a cardinal – liked to use to define the church.

This goodness of the spirit, coupled with great serenity and peace, which draws on a profound communion with God cultivated in prayer and meditation, gives him an uncommon authority. Above all, he has great interior freedom, a gift which he showed to the youth in St. Peter’s Square on Palm Sunday. In short, we can expect from him great pastoral and spiritual intutitions to guide the Church better and to serve it in unity and apostolicity.

To complete this sketch, I would like to report what Joseph Ratzinger said about himself in 2001, when certainly he did not think he would become Pope, in a conversation with Radio Vatican:

“A self-portrait is impossible. I can only say that I come from a very simple family, very humble, and so, I do not feel myself to be a cardinal as much as I am just a simple man. In Germany I live in a little town with persons who work in agriculture or artisanry – there I feel at home. At the same time, I try to stay the same way even in my office, if I can do it. I dare not judge myself.

“I remember with deep affection the goodness of my father and my mother, and naturally for me, goodness also implies the ability to say No, because a goodness that allows everything will not be good ultimately, and sometimes goodness can mean saying “no” even if that sounds like a contradiction.

“But even goodness should be truly nourished, not by a sense of power or validation, but it should come from the ultimate goodness, the desire to do good to others. These are my criteria, this is where I come from.”

He adds: “Nothing is done by myself alone. This is very important – not to make personal decisions only, but to do it in collaboration.”

Finally, the words he said on April 25, at the solemn inauguration of his Pontificate, were very illuminating: “ My real program of government is not to do my own will. Not to follow my own ideas, but to listen, with the whole Church, to the Word and the will of the Lord, and allow myself to be guided by Him, so that it is He Himself who will guide the Church in this hour of our history.

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 14/04/2006 8.19]

TERESA BENEDETTA
Friday, April 14, 2006 8:26 AM
MAUNDY THURSDAY WITH THE POPE
ROME, 13 April 2006 (AP) - Pope Benedict XVI Thursday recounted the Biblical betrayal of Jesus by Judas, calling the apostle a double-crosser for whom "money was more important than communion with Jesus, more important than God and his love."

Benedict's traditional depiction of Judas came during his Holy Thursday homily, a week after the release of an ancient Egyptian Coptic text dubbed the "Gospel of Judas," in which Judas is portrayed not as Jesus' betrayer but as his confidant who was doing his will by handing him over to his enemies to be crucified.

Holy Thursday marks the start of a series of solemn ceremonies in the Catholic Church in which the faithful relive Jesus' suffering, crucifixion and death — and then his resurrection on Easter Sunday.

During the service, the holy father humbly washed the feet of 12 men, re-enacting Jesus' washing of his apostles' feet during the Last Supper and saying the act cleansed the "filth" of mankind.

As a choir's hymn filled St. John Lateran Basilica in Rome, Benedict poured water from a golden vase over each of the men's feet and scrubbed each one dry in an act of humility and service.

In his homily, Benedict said Jesus washed his disciples' feet to purify them so they could join him at the Last Supper, the meal which the faithful believe Jesus shared with his apostles before he was betrayed by his apostle Judas and crucified.

"God comes down and becomes a slave; he washes our feet so we can be at his table," Benedict said. "The bath in which he washes us is his love, ready to confront death. Only love has the purifying force that takes away our filth and elevates us to God."

Benedict's homily adhered to the traditional portrayal of Judas as betraying Jesus.

The "Gospel of Judas" tells a far different tale from the four gospels in the New Testament. It portrays Judas as a favored disciple who was given special knowledge by Jesus — and turned him in at Jesus' request. It portrays Judas as being told spiritual secrets that the other apostles were not.

The Egyptian Coptic text, one of several ancient documents found in the Egyptian desert in 1970, was preserved and translated by a team of scholars. The text was made public last week.

Benedict presided over another Mass dedicated to priests during which he recalled the sacrifice of a cleric slain in Turkey.

Benedict read a letter written by Rev. Andrea Santoro in which the Italian prelate spoke of his willingness to offer his own body for the sake of preaching Catholicism in largely Muslim Turkey.

Santoro, 60, was shot and killed Feb. 5 while he prayed in his parish in the Black Sea city of Trabzon. Witnesses said the killer, a 16-year-old boy, screamed "Allahu Akbar," Arabic for "God is great," before firing two bullets into Santoro's back.

Benedict quoted Santoro as saying in his letter that he had chosen to live in Turkey to be among its people, "lending" his body to Christ to do so.

Santoro's slaying occurred at the height of unrest in the Muslim world over caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad published in Europe. Top church officials have called Santoro a martyr.
----------------------------------------------------------------

Here is a report from AsiaNews with more detail about the Pope's homily at the Mass of the Lord's Supper:

Roma, 13 April 2006 (AsiaNews) – The washing of the feet, which Pope Benedict XVI performed for the first time today as Pontiff as he did last year as Dean of the College of Cardinals, echoes the one carried out by Jesus “whose gesture cleanses our filth with the purifying force of his goodness”.

Benedict XVI’s first Cœna Domini mass was celebrated once again in St John Lateran Basilica. Pope John Paul II’s ailing health had prevented him from conducting the service in the same location for several years. Benedict XVI also performed the washing of the feet on 12 men.

The deed that Jesus carried out is, in the Pontiff’s words, a gesture of love that knows no bounds, one that can be refused according to the Gospel’s tradition.

“It is pride that fails to confess and acknowledge that we need purification. In Judas we see the nature of this refusal.”

Judas “values Jesus in terms of power and success. For him only power and success are real; love does not count. His greed for money is more important than communion with Jesus, more important than God and His love. And so he lies, double-crosses and breaks away from the truth. He lives in lies and loses the sense of the supreme truth of God. This way he becomes hardened, incapable of conversion and going back as a prodigal son, and throws away his destroyed life.”

"In the gesture of “washing the feet” we see “God’s holiness, which is not only an incandescent power before which we must pull back terrified, but is also the power of love and because of this is a purifying and healing power. God descends, becoming slave; he washes our feet so that we can be at the table.

"The mystery of Jesus Christ is in all this. In this, what redemption is becomes clear. The bath in which we cleanse ourselves is his love readied to face death. Only love has this purifying strength that wipes away filth end elevates us to God’s heights.

"The bath that purifies us is He himself who gives Himself totally to us, as far as the depth of His suffering and death. He is continually this love that cleanses. In the Sacraments of purification—baptism and the sacrament of penitence — He is continually kneeling before our feet and serving us as a slave, [performing] the service of purification that makes us capable of God. His love is inexhaustible; it really goes on till the end.”

But today, “what does ‘washing of the feet, concretely mean? Every deed of goodness for our fellows, especially for the suffering and those held in low regard, is like the service of the washing of the feet. The Lord calls us to do this, step down [from our pedestal], learn to be humble, have the courage to be good and available to accept refusal, and yet trust goodness and persevere in it.

"But there is also a deeper dimension. The Lord wipes away our filth with the purifying force of his goodness. Washing one another’s feet means above all forgiving one another other tirelessly, always ready to start together anew even when it seems pointless. It means purifying one another by helping each other and accepting that others help us; [it means] purifying one another by giving each other the hallow strength of God’s word and introducing ourselves to the Sacrament of Divine Love.”

As a way to demonstrate solidarity to those who suffer, offerings collected during the service will go to help rebuild homes for the victims of the devastating mudslides that affected people in the Diocese of Maasin (Philippines).

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 14/04/2006 8.39]

TERESA BENEDETTA
Friday, April 14, 2006 3:00 PM
'VIA CRUCIS' MEDITATIONS EXCORIATE SINS OF CONTEMPORARY SOCIETY
On www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,13509-2134140,00.html
the Times of London builds its Good Friday Vatican article on the Meditations for the Way of the Cross written by Mons. Angelo Comastri, the Pope's Vicar for Vatican State, who was asked by the Pope to prepare it for tonight's traditional Via Crucis observance at the Rome Colosseum. The Holy Father will lead the rites.

Comastri's meditations include unusually direct and harsh denunciations of the anti-Christian values and practices that prevail today in the societies of the industrialized world. This took its cue obviously from the now-famous Meditation on the 9th Station of the Cross that Cardinal Ratzinger wrote for last year's Via Crucis, in which he referred to the "filth" in the Church which priests themselves have brought to it.

However, while it is understandable, given the mentality of MSM, that the article should pick out only the most 'blistering' quotes from the Meditations, one must consider the entire spiritual exercise in its entirety. It makes very easy reading because Comastri chose to express himself in prose poetry - short sentences, very effective phrases, and all the right touches of rhetorical enhancement that make for maximum impact. Much of it reiterates the message of Deus caritas est - God is love, and this love - and the divine mercy that comes with it - is greater than man's capacity to sin.
www.vatican.va/news_services/liturgy/2006/documents/ns_lit_doc_20060414_via-crucis-present...
(for the presentation and opening prayer), and
www.vatican.va/news_services/liturgy/2006/documents/ns_lit_doc_20060414_via-crucis...
(for the Meditations and Prayers on the 14 Stations of the Cross)

The other thing to consider is that this is not really "news" in the sense that the full text of the 2006 Via Crucis Meditations were released by the Vatican online on April 11, the same day that printed copies were released in bookstores throughout Italy.

Here is the Times article
.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Pope condemns geneticists
'who play at being God'

By Ruth Gledhill, Religion Correspondent

THE Pope will deliver a blistering attack on the “satanic” mores of modern society today, warning against an “inane apologia of evil” that is in danger of destroying humanity.

In a series of Good Friday meditations that he will lead in Rome, the Pope will say that society is in the grip of a kind of “anti-Genesis” described as “a diabolical pride aimed at eliminating the family”. He will pray for society to be cleansed of the “filth” that surrounds it and be restored to purity, freed from “decadent narcissism”.

Particular condemnation is reserved for scientific advances in the field of genetic manipulation. Warning against the move to “modify the very grammar of life as planned and willed by God”, the Pope will lead prayers against “insane, risky and dangerous” ventures in attempting “to take God’s place without being God”.

The Pope has not actually composed the prayers for the traditional Way of the Cross, but is certain to have given his blessing to the Good Friday meditations at the Colosseum.

Their author is Archbishop Angelo Comastri, Vicar General at Vatican City. The tone of the meditations is striking in its contrast to the contemporary fashion for feel-good religion.

While some will regard their emphasis on sin and the dark side of human nature as retrograde, others will welcome them as a sign of the strong and conservative leadership that Pope Benedict XVI was elected to provide. All Roman Catholic churches and many others, including Anglican churches in the Anglo-Catholic tradition, celebrate a liturgy around the Stations of the Cross on Good Friday.

The 14 stations begin with Jesus’s condemnation to death, take Christians through meditations of the “Way of the Cross” and the Crucifixion and end with the laying of Jesus’s body in the tomb. The Pope wrote the meditations himself for last year’s Way of the Cross in Rome. But today’s Catholic prayers, published in Italian this week and in English on the Zenit website yesterday, go further than most in their thorough denunciation of contemporary culture.

At the Third Station of the Cross, where Jesus falls for the first time, Archbishop Comastri has written: “Lord, we have lost our sense of sin. Today a slick campaign of propaganda is spreading an inane apologia of evil, a senseless cult of Satan, a mindless desire for transgression, a dishonest and frivolous freedom, exalting impulsiveness, immorality and selfishness as if they were new heights of sophistication.”

At the Fourth Station, where Jesus is helped by Simon the Cyrene to carry the cross, Pope Benedict and his followers will pray: “Lord Jesus, our affluence is making us less human, our entertainment has become a drug, a source of alienation, and our society’s incessant, tedious message is an invitation to die of selfishness.”

One of the strongest meditations warns against the attack on the family. “Today we seem to be witnessing a kind of anti-Genesis, a counter-plan, a diabolical pride aimed at eliminating the family.”

There is a moving meditation for the Eighth Station, where Jesus meets the women of Jerusalem, describing the “River of tears shed by mothers, mothers of the crucified, mothers of murderers, mothers of drug addicts, mothers of terrorists, mothers of rapists, mothers of psychopaths, but mothers all the same”.

The Pope will also confront the question of evil in the world in a meditation that asks: “Where is Jesus in the agony of our own time, in the division of our world into belts of prosperity and belts of poverty . . . in one room they are concerned about obesity, in the other, they are begging for charity?”

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 14/04/2006 15.14]

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 15/04/2006 0.19]

TERESA BENEDETTA
Friday, April 14, 2006 7:36 PM
BENEDICT AND THE YOUTH
In Avvenire, the newspaper of the Italian bishops conference, a Roman priest evaluates the impact of Benedict XVI on young people. Here is a translation-


The ability to talk to young people, his tenderness with children, his simple language.

These are for Don Paolo Giulietti, in charge of the Italian bishops conference for the pastoral care of youth, the personal traits that stand out particularly in the first year of Benedict XVI’s pontificate.

Starting under the burden of succeeding to a figure like John Paul II – who had a special rapport with young people - Giulietti says Benedict XVI has caught the attention of young people for these traits, particularly "his tenderness with children and a language that is simple but profound.”

World Youth Day in Cologne (August 2005) represented a baptism of fire for Papa Ratzinger. We retain vivid images of the Pope on a boat along the Rhine, greeted by tens of thousands of young people along both riverbanks, many of them wading into the river to get nearer, as well as the million youth who gathered in prayer at Marienfeld.

On October 15, the gathering at St. Peter’s Square of more than 100,000 children who recently received First Communion was probably one of the most evocative events of the Year of the Eucharist.

Finally, the Pope’s meeting at St. Peter’s Square on April 6 with the youth of Rome and Lazio province, and the Palm Sunday celebrations a few days later with the turnover of the WYD Cross and Marian icon from the German youth to their Australian colleagues who will host the next international WYD in Sydney in 2008.

After a year, how do you evaluate the transition from John Paul II to Benedict XVI?
I think Benedict XVI lives the legacy of his predecessor not as a dificulty but as a richness. He has chosen continuity with John Paul II. But a comparison between the two is perhaps to be expected, I would even say, almost spontaneous, among the young people, with whom Papa Ratzinger has been building day by day his own personal rapport.

What would that be?
It is emerging from the various encounters we have attended. The youth are discovering in him someone who pays great attention to the content of what he says, articulated in simple, understandable language. A genuine and correct didactic presence. Even the encyclical Deus caritas est is one great lesson. Young people like this. The ability to say important things simply is typical of great men. Whoever knows something really well can explain it even to children. I think the Pope perceives the need of young people for better knowledge, more depth and understanding. The Pope has a didactic method that young people are starting to appreciate.”

Therefore, language as a novelty?
Benedict XVI uses language that is even, profound, clear and understandable, which facilitates contact and closeness to young people. And they have known how to receive this and to appreciate his gifts above and beyond any comparisons with his predecessor. The youth are not so much looking for a role model now – they have welcomed Benedict without prejudices and with great intelligence.

These days, there is much talk already about the next WYD in Sydney, towards which the Pope has already established stages to be completed towards the event itself.
I appreciate the organic nature of that strategy which aims for a complete spiritual involvement of the youth whether or not they plan to go to Sydney. It shows Benedict’s attention to the educational and formative years. Young people must realize that WYD is not an isolated event but must be seen as a step in the growth of one’s faith. The preparatory aspects for the event say much about Benedict’s desire to orient religious events for the benefit of young people.

Do you have a particular memory you will keep of this year?
Definitely - the encounter on October 15, 2005, with the children who had recently taken First Communion. It revealed an extraordinary personality, richly human and capable of conversing with children. It was truly unexpected. That figure amid the crowd of children, his simple language, his tenderness – he seemed to me a most affectionate and attentive grandfather.”
----------------------------------------------------------------

Here is another evaluation of the Benedict effect among the youth:

Even Ratzinger is popular:
Young people want substance,
not rockstar effects


John Paul II filled the piazzas, and the churches, whatever some may say, did not empty out. This is the firm belief of Massimo Introvigne, sociologist, editorial writer and director of Cesnur (acronym from the Italian for Center for studies on new religions).

Introvigne also says he is not surprised at the unexpected popularity of Benedict XVI one year since the death of John Paul II and the Pope’s own election.

Packed town squares but empty churches? “The phenomenon may be true in France, Spain, the United Kingdom and Germany, but not in Italy, the United States, Africa and Asia, where there are data that are positively extraordinary,” Introvigne said in a telephone interview. “John Paul II filled the town squares, but he also contributed to stopping the hemorrhaging of Church attendance, specially as it concerns young people.”

And how would he explain the popularity of Papa Ratzinger who has a much more laidback style than his predecessor?

“It shows that the analysts were wrong when they explained the massive crowds at John Paul’s funeral by drawing a parallel to the success of a rock star. Benedict XVI does not have rock-star qualities but the youth continue to be inspired.”

Introvigne recalls that the organizers of WYD in Cologne last August had not expected the number of visitors they actually got and failed to prepare enough food bags for the big events at Marienfeld.

“In great part, this success was due to the enthusiasm that had been aroused by John Paul II. It remains to be seen whether it goes on indefinitely. But it is certainly an enthusiasm that was not devoid of content. Surely, not all who took part in WYD later went on to read texts by John Paul II or became more frequent massgoers, but many of them did.”

Independently of the Pope's personality, Introvigne points out, there is also a return to religion at present, presaging a crisis in secularism, in Europe as well as around the world.

He cites current events to prove it: the weight that religious values played in the reelection of George W. Bush in the United States, the relative strength of the Hindu party BJP in India,
the poor electoral showing of secular slates in the Iraq elections or in the Palestinian territory, as well as the recent success of religious parties in the Israeli elections.

He concludes that “there is a return to religion around the world.”





[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 14/04/2006 19.41]

benefan
Friday, April 14, 2006 10:01 PM
Pope of Surprises?

John Paul II was a tough act to follow. A long-time Vatican observer reflects on Benedict’s first year.

By Edward Pentin
Special to Newsweek

April 13, 2006 - It was never going to be easy for Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger to step into the large shoes of Pope John Paul II. Not only did he have a huge act to follow, but he carried the unflattering label “God’s Rottweiler,” given to him by some critics in reference to his previous role as defender of church doctrine. And, at 78 (he will be 79 on Easter Sunday), he certainly didn’t have the advantages of youth on his side. So one year on, how has he fared?

Father Richard John Neuhaus, editor of First Things, a religion and culture journal based in Rockford, Ill., is a Roman Catholic priest who has observed the Vatican for many years. Neuhaus recently spoke with Edward Pentin about Benedict’s first 12 months as leader of the world’s 1.1 billion Roman Catholics. Excerpts:

NEWSWEEK: When Pope Benedict XVI was elected, some feared he would be a “hard-line conservative.” After one year, have these fears been realized?

Richard John Neuhaus: Speaking of a pope as a hard-line conservative or a soft liberal are simply the wrong categories. Obviously any pope is a conservative in the sense that his primary job is to conserve the tradition and pass it on. And he’s a liberal in the sense that he is to give himself generously to the universal church. Pope Benedict is Joseph Ratzinger become pope.

What have been his biggest achievements so far?

Benedict is very effectively continuing the adventurous initiatives of his predecessor John Paul the Great. On some questions he has obviously thought that a different approach is appropriate. For example, perhaps because he is not the dramatic figure both by biography and talent of John Paul, he has been more low-key. He has very deliberately wanted to emphasize that the pope is at the service of the universal church, meaning first of all, the college of bishops. So his consultations [with them] have been more lively in their interactive nature. He has also taken a firmer and, one might say, candid approach to the relationship with Islam, insisting rightly that there has to be genuine reciprocity in terms of religious freedom. So in these ways there are marked differences, but, of course, in the very nature of the office of the pope the continuities will always be stronger than the discontinuities.

He’s been called a pope of surprises. Has this pontificate been a surprise to you in any way?

No, not really, it’s pretty much what I expected. I very much welcomed the election of Joseph Ratzinger. I think he’s been misunderstood by a lot of people. For example, on his first encyclical [a type of papal communication to his followers], “God Is Love,” the media and a lot of people closer to Rome who should have known better, said “Oh isn’t that sweet: the Rottweiler comes out with a warm and fuzzy encyclical that says God is really very nice.” Well, this is nonsense. I realize there’re rumors that those were from notes left over for an encyclical planned by John Paul II, but I don’t think that’s the case. It’s typical Ratzinger in which he makes some very forceful statements about the relationship between the church and the political realm and reiterates many of the arguments he made in criticism of various utopian Christian projects, including liberation theology. So it’s simply inaccurate to say the encyclical was a warm and fuzzy public-relations ploy to put a friendly face on Benedict XVI.

Some conservatives say he needs to wield the knife a bit more—root out stray bishops who are not loyal to church doctrine and streamline the Curia [the papal cabinet] to make it less bureaucratic. Do you think he needs to be tougher in this regard?

I think he’s tough enough. He simply seems to have a different time frame in mind. I have no doubt there will be more and more major curial changes in the months ahead. But I have been, and maybe this is an element of surprise, though it’s probably more of curiosity than surprise, that for a man who’s now [78] years old, he clearly seems to think he has a considerable period of time in which to bring about the changes that I expect he intends to bring about [these changes could include reducing the size or number of Vatican departments and generally bringing the church’s administrative activities closer to the people—aspirations Pope Benedict had before he was elected].

Other observers expected Benedict to tackle secularism in Europe, but he doesn’t seem to have made a big push in this area yet.

He’s clearly continuing to develop the conversation with European thinkers. Whether they are themselves Catholic or even Christian, they recognize the Christian character of Western civilization and are open to working with the church, and Benedict obviously welcomes that approach.

Benedict XVI is less of a media star than John Paul II, and since his election, many people will have heard little more about him. Is that a problem in terms of the Roman Catholic Church reaching out to people?

On the other hand, his audiences on Wednesdays and other affairs are attracting larger crowds than John Paul II did. I don’t know how to explain that, except someone said that people came to see John Paul, and they come to hear Benedict. It’s a nice phrase, but whether it’s true or not … I expect a factor in the large crowds he’s attracting is that, quite frankly, as much as my love for John Paul is second to none, in those last 10 years people couldn’t understand him most of the time, whereas it’s easy to understand Benedict.

How do you think the future of this pontificate will pan out? Will there be more surprises, a breakthrough in Vatican relations with China perhaps?

That seems to be moving ahead, but obviously it’s highly unpredictable. Certainly the Chinese seem to have been more responsive in the last few months than they’ve been before. The other great question, of course, is whether there’s been any movement in terms of Eastern Orthodoxy. The theory I propounded is that the orthodox would be more comfortable with a German Pope than a Polish pope given the history of Russia and Poland over the centuries. But having said that, there’s not much evidence of flexibility on the Russian side—so far. But who knows?

Ecumenism is important to Benedict. Will that remain so?

Yes, I’m sure. I know it’s the case with Benedict from the many conversations with him over the years that his understanding of the priority of reconciliation with the East is every bit as urgent as it was with John Paul.

And also with the Episcopalians, but not so much perhaps?

Yes, but there is the great sadness [among many Roman Catholics] over what's happening to the Anglican Communion [the ordaining of an openly gay man as bishop in New Hampshire, and the ordination of women as priests and bishops], and so I'm afraid that relations with the Christian communities in the West, while the Catholic Church's ecumenical commitment remains irrevocable, expectations are at this point at a rather low ebb, whether with Anglicans, Lutherans or anybody else.

[Modificato da benefan 14/04/2006 22.05]

benefan
Friday, April 14, 2006 10:20 PM
Benedict and the papacy
4/13/2006

National Catholic Register

Benedict XVI is Peter’s successor, not John Paul’s.

A year ago, it seemed that John Paul had changed the papacy forever. Papal traditions for him were a like a carpenter’s toolbox – he grabbed the ones he needed, added what wasn’t there and left the others in the box.

Symbols like the papal coat of arms and the holy door were old and arcane. John Paul took them up and transformed them, using the coat of arms to deliver his Marian motto “Totus Tuus” and turning the holy door into a powerful symbol of renewal for the entire church. He urgently needed to reach the youth and priests, so he invented World Youth Day and the annual Holy Thursday letter to priests, and added these tools to the box.

By using the papacy as he saw fit, John Paul consternated Vatican handlers and energized followers around the globe.

But he also put what looked like an impossible burden on his successor. The question would inevitably hover: Would the new pope try to imitate John Paul’s ways or distance himself from them? Either way, the next pope seemed destined to stay in the shadow of his predecessor.

Pope Benedict’s greatest accomplishment after one year as pope seems to be that he has shown that the papacy was always far larger even than John Paul the Great.

Some of the traditions that John Paul retired, it seems, will never return. Benedict has declined to revive the papal tiara and other trappings of power. But he has restored others.

For instance, Benedict returned to the coat of arms tradition that popes have always used, but declined the John Pauline innovation of a papal motto, saying that his papacy stood for any and every expression of faith, hope and charity that is authentic. Similarly, he has returned to many of the old traditions of papal dress – red shoes, a stocking cap when it’s cold – simply, it seems, because that’s what popes wear.

Benedict will continue John Paul’s World Youth Day tradition, but has chosen not to continue the Holy Thursday letters to priests. In such things, the holy father seems to be asking himself not, “What would John Paul do?” but “What should the successor of Peter do?”

And in doing so, he has reminded us all that the papacy isn’t a human invention that draws its power from the persona of the pope, but a divine institution that draws its power from grace.

This has not gone unnoticed in the media. Time magazine reporter Jeff Israel noted it in August when Pope Benedict visited Cologne’s synagogue during World Youth Day.

He described what happened after the pope’s entry and greeting. After a brief ceremony and remarks from a Holocaust survivor, the holy father spoke.

“But there was something happening that went beyond words,” wrote Israel. “It was in the way the pope listened so intently to his hosts. It was the warm, two-hand embrace he shared with the young rabbi. It was in the somber cadence of his voice as he recounted Nazi atrocities, and the utter silence in the synagogue to hear his every breath.”

Israel said it only later dawned on him what was so powerful about the pope’s presentation – a powerful enough to earn a standing ovation from his hosts.

“Why didn’t Papa Ratzinger make even one small reference to his own experience?” he wrote. “John Paul II spoke about his own experiences every chance he could, about knowing Jews who were deported from his hometown in Poland. But perhaps Benedict, beyond a basic human shyness, also sees his role differently than his predecessor. He doesn’t want to impose his own persona on the pontificate. He doesn’t want his life’s story to represent the church’s. He wants his words to educate as much as inspire.”

We thank God for Pope John Paul II. In him, we had a charismatic leader reawakening the church at a time when we desperately needed that. But now we are grateful for Benedict, quietly educating the church in the kind of mature faith he spoke about at the opening of the conclave – the “adult faith” that doesn’t depend on inspiration and charisma but on abiding friendship with Jesus.

John Paul’s signature phrase “Be not afraid!” thrilled us. But Benedict’s is just as full of hope. “The Church is alive,” he has said, “and the church is young.”

He’s right. We are young. And we’re grateful to have him for our teacher, helping the church continue grow into what God wants us to be.

benefan
Friday, April 14, 2006 10:32 PM
Pope leads Way of the Cross procession

FRANCES D'EMILIO
Associated Press
ROME - Pope Benedict XVI reflected on the suffering of Christ and that of humanity throughout the ages as he led thousands of pilgrims and tourists in a torch-lit Way of the Cross procession at the Colosseum in Rome to mark Good Friday.

Opening the late-night procession with a prayer, Benedict said Jesus' suffering "is the whole of human history, a history where the good are humiliated, the meek assaulted, the honest crushed, and the pure of heart roundly mocked."

But, anticipating the joy that Christians share on Easter Sunday in their belief that Jesus rose from the dead, Benedict told the faithful that in Jesus "the good have already won" and the "meek have already triumphed."

Wearing a red cloak, Benedict gripped the slender, dark wooden cross as he began the procession, and the reflection of the flickering lights of candles held by faithful played on the wood.

"Lord Jesus, tonight we walk once more the way of your cross, knowing that it is also our way," Benedict said.

Benedict, who turns 79 on Easter Sunday, stepped briskly along the path through the ancinet ruins, before he handed over the cross to Italian Cardinal Camillo Ruini, his vicar for Rome.

Mexican, Korean, Angolan and Nigerian lay people and a Roman family were among the others who were taking turns in bearing the cross after Benedict.

The procession re-enacts Jesus' suffering, crucifixion and death.

Earlier in the evening, Benedict clutched a tall wooden crucifix in St. Peter's Basilica as he bowed his head silently in prayer and reflection toward the end of two-hour long ceremony.

During that service, Benedict heard a homily by the papal household's preacher, who attacked works such as "The Da Vinci Code," which deny Vatican teaching about Jesus and his life and lamented that a movie was being made about the best-selling work.

Last year, a dying Pope John Paul II failed to participate in the procession for the first time in his papacy.

Instead, John Paul silently watched the ritual on TV from his papal apartment and listened to the meditations, which were composed by German Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. Less than a month later, he would be elected pontiff after John Paul's death, taking the name Benedict XVI.
mag6nideum
Friday, April 14, 2006 11:30 PM
RE:Via Crucis
I hope all folks could watch the Via Crucis enactment at the Roman Colloseum. Very moving and beautiful. It was the first time I could experience this.
Sylbilmo
Saturday, April 15, 2006 12:32 AM
The Pope's Easter
WONDER LAND

The Pope's Easter
Benedict XVI takes on the excesses of secularization and radical Islam.

BY DANIEL HENNINGER
Friday, April 14, 2006 12:01 a.m. EDT

If we still hold that the news reflects reality, we would be led to believe that Christians enter these final three days of Holy Week preoccupied with whether to credit the new Gospel of Judas that the hallowed National Geographic Society delivered unto the world this month, and whether to attend the imminent film version of "The Da Vinci Code," purporting that the Vatican has covered up Jesus' marriage to Mary Magdalene. My guess is that on this Easter Pope Benedict XVI, the new leader of the world's 1.2 billion Catholics, feels he has larger fish to fry than the marital status of Jesus. He did, however, in his Holy Thursday homily yesterday pointedly demote Judas for whom "only power and success are realities."

To a surprising extent, the pope's world is our world. His problems are the same problems that bedevil the political life of the United States: violence against the innocent under the cloak of Islam, the disdain of Old Europe, establishing an acceptable price for doing business with China, the pain of Africa's genocides and epidemics. These issues inhabit the public square, and inevitably through history the world's largest, centrally organized religion has faced onto that square.

Now comes a new kind of mosque. And this pope knows it.

Each January the pope delivers a formal address to the diplomatic corps attached to the Holy See. This year Benedict gave his first. Read the following and watch the religious wheat separated from the terrorist chaff:

"Attention has rightly been drawn to the danger of a clash of civilizations," said Benedict. "The danger is made more acute by organized terrorism, which has already spread over the whole planet. Its causes are many and complex, not least those to do with political ideology, combined with aberrant religious ideas. Terrorism does not hesitate to strike defenseless people, without discrimination, or to impose inhuman blackmail, causing panic among entire populations, in order to force political leaders to support the designs of the terrorists. No situation can justify such criminal activity, which covers the perpetrators with infamy, and it is all the more deplorable when it hides behind religion, thereby bringing the pure truth of God down to the level of the terrorists' own blindness and moral perversion."

Moral perversion? We indeed have a pope, one, it appears, who won't pull his punches, and one who like the rest of us just now must contemplate the meaning of Flight 93's hijackers driving a passenger airliner to earth while chanting, "Allah is the greatest."

Any leader has to pick his fights, and my guess is that this pope will take his to the place he knows best--Europe. In the post-Soviet Europe that Pope John Paul II helped bring to life, there is already political tension between the more actively religious peoples of Eastern Europe--particularly Poland, Lithuania and Slovakia--and an assertively secular West. In February the European Union, the official arm of secular Europe, threw down the gauntlet; it effectively collapsed the government of Slovakia over a religious issue.

In 2003 the government of Slovakia signed a concordat with the Vatican to let doctors and health-care workers in Catholic hospitals decline to participate in abortions as a matter of conscience. This January the EU's Network of Independent Experts on Fundamental Rights (their real name, not an Orwellian satire) ruled Slovakia in violation of its EU "obligations." Translation: Tell those Catholic docs to do abortions or we will hammer you financially. The political tensions split Slovakia's government, and in February it fell.

We may assume the new pope noticed this re-invasion of Slovakia. George Weigel of Washington's Ethics and Public Policy Center, probably our most astute analyst of the papacy as a political actor (his biography of John Paul was a bestseller), has just written an absorbing book-length commentary on the new pope's probable direction called "God's Choice" (Harper Collins). "Ratzinger has been thinking about Europe for 25 years," Mr. Weigel told me. "He needs to address the problem of a Europe in which consciences are being coerced by transnational institutions. This is the cash-out of what he means by the dictatorship of relativism. It's a real issue with real world consequences." Mr. Weigel notes Benedict will go to Cologne in September, and this could be the venue for a large, Europe-directed statement on the place of religion in contemporary society.

Don't write off the effort as quixotic. In 2004 then-Cardinal Ratzinger, one of the world's eminent theologians, made his case in a debate with the famous German philosopher Jürgen Habermas, himself a kind of secular saint. Habermas emerged from what turned into a dialogue with Ratzinger to cause a mini-sensation by suggesting that religious communities deserve respect for having "preserved intact something which has elsewhere been lost." There are signs, small as mustard seeds, of revival: In a paper last month for the American Enterprise Institute, Christopher Levenick drew attention to the renewed interest in monastic life inside Italy. In the past year some 550 women, most college-educated Italians, entered cloistered convents, according to Italy's Union of Mother Superiors.

If the pope's problems in Europe are mainly a struggle over the life of the soul, in foreign policy it is often a death struggle. Amid Denmark's prophet Muhammad cartoon debacle, Muslims in Maiduguri, Nigeria burned 11 churches and murdered 15 minority Christians. "For a Nigerian Catholic prelate," says Mr. Weigel, "the pope is a lifeline to the outside world." No one knows that better than the estimated eight million Catholics in China's persecuted underground church. Last month Benedict announced his desire to visit the mainland. The political hurdles are high. What should be the price of a papal visit? A Chinese claim to name his new bishops? Throwing over Taiwan's Catholics? It makes Google's political problems there look, well, young.

On Sunday Benedict XVI will send his first Easter address into the world, and it will be deeply spiritual. But the wry American who once said all politics is local spoke in a tongue that this new leader of a billion far-flung souls had to learn the day he took office.

Mr. Henninger is deputy editor of The Wall Street Journal's editorial page. His column appears Fridays in the Journal and on OpinionJournal.com.
benefan
Saturday, April 15, 2006 1:22 AM

THANKS, SYLBILMO

That's a very interesting and rather positive article about Papa. Although Mr. Henninger makes a couple of small errors (he's not a professional Papa watcher like us), it is nice to see someone from the mainstream media writing in a favorable way about Papa and religion. In fact, I do think Papa is changing the views of a lot of mainstream journalists, judging from the many complimentary one-year reports being written about him and his beliefs. He is almost making it fashionable to believe.



TERESA BENEDETTA
Saturday, April 15, 2006 2:11 AM
KNOCK ON WOOD...
Thanks, Sylvia, for the Henningen article. With Benefan's postings of Fr. Neuhaus's interview in Newsweek and the piece from National Catholic Register, this is truly icing on the cake following the inspiring rites of Good Friday today.

For fear of speaking too soon and perhaps putting a jinx on what seems to be a positive roll, as in "he's on a roll," for Benedict where the English-speaking MSM is concerned, I have withheld comment on the spate of positive articles that have come out so far assessing Benedict XVI's first 12 months of Pope. And since all of us are constantly on the hunt for any and all articles about him, I don't think we have been falsely isolated from less positive assessments.

Also, I had wanted to do a rough analysis in terms of any common conclusions or fresh insights that have been reached within the past year. The top commonplace so far would go to something one may formulate this way: "Oh look, God's Rottweiler turns out to be the Valentine Pope, the Pope of love!" - exchanging one facile and totally false stereotype for another equally facile but at least well-meaning tag.

Just a few thoughts on these last 3 articles:
First, I am so glad Father Neuhaus had a chance to set the record straight - and in a magazine with the circulation of Newsweek - about what he thinks of Benedict. Quite a few Catholic liberals have gloatingly misrepresented him the past few weeks by claiming that he is among those "formerly rabid supporters" of Joseph Ratzinger who are now "extremely disappointed" that he has not done things they expected him to do.

I'd like to pick out three quotes from the interview Fr. Neuhaus gave Newsweek:
1) On this business of tagging people -
"Obviously any pope is a conservative in the sense that his primary job is to conserve the tradition and pass it on. And he’s a liberal in the sense that he is to give himself generously to the universal church. Pope Benedict is Joseph Ratzinger become pope." Great epigram!

2) The ridiculous assumption that Benedict simply gave a tweak here and there to an existing manuscript on 'social charity' that had been prepared for John Paul-II and appended it to his introductory philosophical disquisition to make Part II of Deus caritas est-
"I realize there’re rumors that those were from notes left over for an encyclical planned by John Paul II, but I don’t think that’s the case. It’s typical Ratzinger in which he makes some very forceful statements about the relationship between the church and the political realm and reiterates many of the arguments he made in criticism of various utopian Christian projects, including liberation theology."
I might add they were not simply rumors - there were reports that named Archbishop Paul Cordes of Cor Unum as having ghost-written Part II. And it seems very likely that Cordes did draft a 'social charity' manuscript for John Paul II, but to assume that a writer-thinker like Joseph Ratzinger would simply graft it on to his literal labor of love is absurd! Very likely, Benedict took the manuscript and any research and textual citations that had already been done for it, read it through and used whatever was appropriate, but in his own language and using his own flow of thought and logical structure. Even if such a manuscript had not existed, Deus caritas est obviously and logicaly had to progress towards the idea of social charity and the Church's role in it!

3) Fr. Neuhaus is a brave man!
"I expect a factor in the large crowds he’s attracting is that, quite frankly, as much as my love for John Paul is second to none, in those last 10 years people couldn’t understand him most of the time, whereas it’s easy to understand Benedict."
[And I don't think he was referring to Papa Wojtyla's illness-induced speech difficulties.]

Actually, quite a few writers have come out and actually said what was previously 'unthinkable', or at least, unsayable -though why unthinkable and unsayable, I do not understand, if only because the Holy Spirit has something to do with the emergence of a Pope! But also, there is no rule that says a great Pope can't be succeeded by another great Pope, or at least by someone who has the potential to be a great Pope!

And to praise Benedict is not tantamount to criticizing John Paul II, which seems to be the main reason for all the tiptoeing. [Although there has been quite a lot of the reverse -praising John Paul to denigrate Benedict.)

The author of the article from National Catholic Register does not come out as directly as John Allen did a few weeks ago when he concluded that the Catholic Church needed a giant to replace the giant who was John Paul, the cardinals knew this, and so they chose the only giant available - Joseph Ratzinger.

But he hit upon a very diplomatic formulation anyway:
"Benedict is Peter's successor, not John Paul's."
More-
"Pope Benedict’s greatest accomplishment after one year as pope seems to be that he has shown that the papacy was always far larger even than John Paul the Great."

"...the Holy Father seems to be asking himself not, “What would John Paul do?” but “What should the successor of Peter do?”

"And in doing so, he has reminded us all that the papacy isn’t a human invention that draws its power from the persona of the pope, but a divine institution that draws its power from grace .

And he concludes with a most appropriate, unexceptionable comparison of the two Popes:

"We thank God for Pope John Paul II. In him, we had a charismatic leader reawakening the church at a time when we desperately needed that. But now we are grateful for Benedict, quietly educating the church in the kind of mature faith he spoke about at the opening of the conclave – the 'adult faith' that doesn’t depend on inspiration and charisma but on abiding friendship with Jesus.

"John Paul’s signature phrase 'Be not afraid!' thrilled us. But Benedict’s is just as full of hope. 'The Church is alive,' he has said, 'and the church is young.'

"He’s right. We are young. And we’re grateful to have him for our teacher, helping the church continue grow into what God wants us to be."

As for the Wall Street Journal's Mr. Henningen, he is one of the very few MSM Anglophone writers who has taken more than just fleeting note of Benedict's speech to the diplomatic corps in January.


[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 15/04/2006 2.16]

TERESA BENEDETTA
Saturday, April 15, 2006 4:13 PM
FOR THE RECORD...
Here is the AsiaNews report on the Via Crucis last night. I have made slight changes to make their published translation (from an Italian original) less awkward:



Before the Way of the Cross
we cannot be mere spectators,
says the Pope

by Franco Pisano

Rome, 14 April 2006 (AsiaNews) – The Via Crucis or Way of the Cross “is not a thing of the past, a given point in time and place,” but an event “that embraces the world across the continents and the ages” before which “we cannot be mere spectators”.

Last year, Cardinal Ratzinger, who composed the Meditations for the Way of the Cross on instructions from John Paul II, astonished with strong words, almost an invective against those who, even and especially within the Church, betray the Crucified Jesus. This year, in his first reflection, expressed extemporaneously, the Pope called on the faithful to share in the suffering and love of God.

“We have accompanied Jesus on the Way of the Cross,” were his first, meaningful words addressed to a crowd of tens of thousands who followed the ritual with fervour.

A few hours earlier, during the adoration of the Cross in St Peter’s, stripped of the symbols of papal power, ring included, Benedict XVI showed his participation in the stripping of Jesus by inviting everyone “to find our place” on the Way of the Cross.

In his first Via Crucis as Pope, Benedict XVI carried the cross in the first and last stations. The other ‘Cyrenians’ were, first, Card. Camillo Ruini, the Pope’s Vicar for the Diocese of Rome; then a Roman family; a Ukrainian Catholic seminarian from the United States; a young Mexican religious (lay nun?); two Franciscans of their order's Custody in the Holy Land; a young Korean woman from Incheon; a lay nun from Angola; and another young woman from Nigeria.

In the Meditations and Prayers for this year's Via Crucis written by Archbishop Angelo Comastri, the Pope’s Vicar General for Vatican City, The Pope said we see in the “suffering of our humanity” “the mirror of the Cross”. The Meditations and prayers reminded the faithful of the sins for which Jesus climbed Calvary....

At the Third Station, Mons. Comastri lamented: "Today we have lost our sense of sin! Today a slick campaign of propaganda is spreading an inane apologia of evil, a senseless cult of Satan, a mindless desire for transgression, a dishonest and frivolous freedom, exalting impulsiveness, immorality and selfishness as if they were new heights of sophistication.”

At the fifth station: “Our affluence is making us less human, our entertainment has become a drug, a source of alienation, and our society’s incessant, tedious message is an invitation to die of selfishness...

At the Seventh Station: "Surely God is deeply pained by the attack on the family. Today we seem to be witnessing a kind of anti-Genesis, a counter-plan, a diabolical pride aimed at eliminating the family. There is a move to reinvent mankind, to modify the very grammar of life as planned and willed by God. But, to take God’s place, without being God, is insane arrogance, a risky and dangerous venture.”

At the Ninth Station, the prayer called on Jesus to end the “division of our world into belts of prosperity and belts of poverty..(because) the world is yours and yours alone. Yet you have given it to everyone so that the earth can become a home where all find nourishment and shelter.”

And at the Tenth Station: “Today, bodies are constantly bought and sold on the streets of our cities, on the streets of our televisions, in homes that have become like streets. When will we realize that we are killing love?”

“We have understood,” Benedict XVI noted, “ that the Way of the Cross is not only a collation of sad things that happen in the world” or “a shout of protest that changes nothing” but “as we have learnt from John Paul II, it is the way of mercy that limits evil”.

He noted that on the Way of the Cross, there were also “stations of consolation” and noted that out of the Cross was born the faith of St. Paul, St. Augustine, St. Francis of Assisi, St. Vincent de Paul, St. Maximilian Kolbe and Mother Teresa, and especially, "the Mother (of the Son of God)whose goodness wass faithful beyond death”. It is Good Friday, the Pope said, “but it is not the last word; the last word is Easter”.
benefan
Saturday, April 15, 2006 4:42 PM
[There is a lot in this article that could be disputed. I'll leave that to others to do. One thing that is relatively minor but which irks me is the result of Rocco Palma's attempts to be cute and gossipy. It was only a matter of time before someone in the mainstream media picked up Rocco's pet name for Papa, "His Fluffiness", which I consider demeaning, and then there is the remark about the tracksuit, which the writer at least indicates could be baseless. Still....]


The pope nobody knows

MICHAEL VALPY
From Saturday's Globe and Mail

VATICAN CITY — April rain clouds scud across St. Peter's Square propelled by a gusty, cold wind. It is just past noon and the end of Wednesday's weekly general papal audience. The open Mercedes-Benz Popemobile carrying white-mopped Benedict XVI rolls down the ramp in front of the basilica and heads toward the Apostolic Palace.

A brass band that has played for him — its members clad in lederhosen — marches off the square with loud oompah-oompahs and banging cymbals, before the baleful gaze of a senior official of the Roman Curia, the papal bureaucracy.

“The bands,” he says, a lace of irritation in his voice. “There seems so many of them now. A German thing, I suppose. Can you imagine trying to do your work against that?”

He gestures next with a sweep of his arm to indicate the thousands of people still standing on the square. “And I suppose you've heard about the crowds? More people turning up for this Pope than used to turn up for John Paul's audiences?”

He takes in the scene in silence for a moment. Then the official — as is customary with Vatican bureaucrats, he has agreed to speak only for background — says unexpectedly: “Why are they there?”

It is a statement capturing perfectly the mood that pervades the Vatican one year into the reign of the new Pope — a mood of uncertainty, of uneasy questioning in the city-state that rules an institutional Christian faith of 1.1 billion adherents.

What is the Roman Catholic Church that the previous Pope, the colossus John Paul II, has left behind? And where will it be taken by the secretive intellectual and scholar Benedict, who has succeeded him — the former Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, incongruously nicknamed His Fluffiness, for his hair?

Perhaps above all, throughout the precincts of Michelangelo's soaring dome and the Doric columns of Bernini's colonnade, the mood is one of apprehension that “behind the great façade of the church,” — as the pre-eminent Swiss Roman Catholic theologian Hans Küng put it in a conversation this week — “the church's life is very poor.”

But there are façades, and façades. Just off St. Peter's on the Piazzo Pio XII, the lederhosen band — Bavarian, of course, like Benedict — blats a dissonant, drooping coda and its musicians set down their instruments, slap each other's backs, laugh too noisily. And why not, having just played at St. Peter's for their Pope?

The contrast they present to the serious Curia bureaucrat could hardly be more striking, as striking as the contrast to the edgy Vatican found in Bavaria itself — Germany's southernmost, predominantly Catholic state, where the cash registers are set to ring in the second tourist season along the Benediktweg, the Benedict Path, tracing young Joseph Ratzinger's early life in the picturesque Alpine countryside.

The future pope's birthplace of Marktl Am Inn (population 2,700), where he spent his first two years as the son of the village police chief, drew 125,000 tourists in 2005. The year before, there were only 3,000. The house where he was born, on the village square, just sold for 3.5 million euros (nearly $5-million). Crucifix cookies and papal-mitre-shaped pastries are for sale in the bakery. The grocery store sells papst-bier — pope beer.

The village council has incorporated its tourism office as a commercial business, and put up more than $400,000 to refurbish a village information centre, design a new traffic plan and parking lot and tour-bus stop, print brochures, put up signs and create a website. At the nearby shrine of Our Lady of Altotting — incidentally, with one of Bavaria's most pleasant restaurants, the Hotel zur Post, on the medieval kappelplatz — Benedict's visit this September is expected to draw hundreds of thousands of people.

An hour's drive south, near the Austrian border, is Traunstein (population 19,000). Brochures advertise Benedict walks and Benedict cycling tours that take visitors to the high school he attended, the empty Ratzinger family house, the parish church of St. Oswald, where he celebrated the first mass of his priesthood, and the local St. Michael's seminary, where until recently he annually spent the week between Christmas and the new year.

Eucharistic vessels that Benedict might have used are in a glass display case in the city hall foyer, along with his portrait, painted by a local artist. A delegation of city officials travelled to Rome after his election to name him an honorary citizen — and to bring him his favourite bread, from Rosemarie Kotter's bakery.

Yet even those blithe scenes cause frowns in the Vatican. It issued a quiet reproof to Marktl Am Inn last year, saying Benedict XVI did not wish to become the object of a personality cult.

One wonders if the Vatican of John Paul II ever sent a similar signal to his Polish birthplace in Wadowice.

The final resting place of popes is the crypt beneath St. Peter's Basilica. Around John Paul II's tomb, the crowd is so dense and the heat from packed bodies so stifling that even breathing is difficult. The yells of security guards, “ Avanti! Avanti!”— move along, move along! — fall largely on deaf ears.

Women of a certain age shout, push and elbow their way to the velvet rope stretched across the alcove in which the tomb sits. Scores of hands hold out rosaries, crucifixes, pieces of cloth for a black-suited attendant to rub on the tomb's white marble slab. Strewn across the alcove floor are flowers, notes, photographs and . . . a blue paper airplane?

Closer inspection shows the airplane to be a note of petition to the late pontiff. The logical explanation is that its author, unable to get near enough to place it on the floor, inventively folded it into a projectile to launch it over the heads of the crowd. It lacks, nonetheless, a certain iconic respectfulness. Perhaps it can be construed as serving notice that no mythology lasts forever.

The epoch of this Pope — of whom it was once said with certainty that he would acquire the appellation “the Great” after his name — is passing into history, and not exactly with the narrative his hagiographers would wish. Here in the Vatican, at the heart of the church he ruled for 26 years, John Paul II's legacy is being prodded and poked.

In the Vatican's public declarations, John Paul II remains the towering “beloved pontiff,” as Benedict called him a few days ago after watching a new film on his life. Seventy-five thousand people stood in St. Peter's Square on the first anniversary of his death — at the precise hour and minute on April 2 — to hold candles in his memory. The kitsch shops in Rome's touristy Borgo Pio district in the shadow of the Vatican continue to robustly peddle John Paul II T-shirts, calendars and myriad other late-pontiff commemorative knick-knacks.

But in the neo-Baroque offices and anterooms of the Curia and surrounding pontifical universities, the conversation is about darker souvenirs. The language is careful; it never approaches denigration. But the nuances, the rhetorical questions asked and left unanswered — “Why are they there?” — speak volumes.

Beyond doubt, say officials and scholars, John Paul II was the consummate showman. He placed his church in the global public sphere as no pope before him has come close to doing.

“John Paul put faith on front pages of newspapers at a time when it wasn't. He gave Catholics self-confidence,” says Professor Diego Contreras, a church communications analyst at Rome's Pontifical University of Santa Croce.

“He was the evangelizing pope,” says the Curia official not fond of Bavarian bands.

But what did the evangelizing pope leave behind that is built upon a rock? In the course of several days of conversations in and around the Vatican, there is no solid answer.

There is, however, a firm response from Hans Küng, the priest and theologian barred under John Paul II's papacy from teaching at a Catholic university because of his dissident writings: “He evangelized against the Pill, against divorce, against abortion, and nothing changed. In fact, it got worse. Young Catholics simply didn't follow his advice.”

In Rome a year after John Paul's death, conversation quickly focuses on his legacy of a Curia ignored and left to slide into dysfunction while the pope travelled the world, haphazardly attempting to manage the church through an incoherent welter of overlapping jurisdictions and churning out lackadaisical busywork — documents upon documents never read or acted upon.

John Paul II's homilies and encyclicals are called impenetrable. His wholesale beatifications and canonizations of saints — more than created by all his predecessors combined — are termed profligate. He is criticized for autocratic imperiousness, his lack of collegiality and consultation and his appointments of weak and ineffective bishops — yes-men whose only discernible merit was their obedience to John Paul.

“Nobody is perfect,” mildly observes Prof. Lluis Clavell, a philosopher at Santa Croce who teaches journalists how to understand the Vatican.

The sharpest jab comes from a Curia bureaucrat: “This Santo Subito business, I find it a bit jarring,” he says, referring to the plethora of banners and placards demanding “Sainthood Now” that appeared among the huge throngs at John Paul's funeral mass last April on St. Peter's Square.

“All those nicely painted signs. You don't just paint a sign like that during communion. It was all a bit” — he searches for the word — “orchestrated.”

All of this critical thinking about the last Pope has the byproduct of bringing his successor into clearer focus. The image being crafted of Benedict says: Here is what was lacking in John Paul.

Rev. Thomas Frauenlob is about to answer the summons from the top.

The 43-year-old is the director of St. Michael's Seminary, the sturdy white building on a hilltop overlooking Traunstein where Benedict spent his Christmas seasons relaxing in seclusion before becoming head of the church.

Now, he has received a letter from the Pope asking him to take a job in the Curia's Congregation for Catholic Education, the Vatican discastery (government department) overseeing Catholic seminaries and universities. He leaves for Rome in a few weeks.

“It is always a bit problematic to be a prodigy of the boss, but I'll be just another modest worker in the vineyard of the Lord,” he says, smiling, echoing the words that Benedict used to describe himself after being elected pope.

For nine years, Father Frauenlob was Cardinal Ratzinger's host on those Christmas breaks. They ate together, went on walks together and watched the nightly news together on television. “His running commentary on the news was very entertaining, but I'm not going to say anything more about it than that,” he says.

Father Frauenlob is discreet, a must-have employment qualification for where he is going — so different from the former era.

John Paul II had a wide circle of friends and acquaintances, mainly Poles. Everyone in the Vatican knew who they were and who he had to lunch at The Apartment, the seven-room papal suite on the top floor of the Apostolic Palace.

As Prof. Contreras, the church communications analyst, explains, they provided an important “informal flow of information.” In a word, they leaked.

“We don't have that at all with this pope.”

The Poles in The Apartment have been replaced by Germans, and the new inner circle is small. “They are people who know how to keep their mouths shut,” Prof. Lluis Clavell says.

Adds the Curia official not fond of Bavarian bands: “The back door has been shut.”

It is another contribution to the Vatican's edginess: As its officials grapple with re-evaluating John Paul's pontificate, they have precious little idea where Benedict's pontificate is going to go.

They don't even have that much of a fix on who the new boss really is — the cat- and Mozart-loving Bavarian intellectual (he turns 79 tomorrow) who, since last April 19, has been the church's 265th Vicar of Christ and Servant of the Servants of God.

His 12 months in the spotlight have revealed little more about him than what seeped to the surface through the 24 years he spent as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the Vatican's watchdog of theological orthodoxy. Or, earlier, as archbishop of Munich, and before that as a professor of theology. That is, not much.

“There are no pictures of Benedict around kayaking,” says a Vatican bureaucrat — again making the comparison to John Paul.

As Pope, Benedict has been photographed wearing a baseball cap and a 12th-century camaulda — kind of a Santa Claus hat — pulled down over his ears. He favours red Prada shoes, and has turned up publicly in an ermine-trimmed shoulder-cape, a mozetta, that no one has seen on a living pope since Paul VI's death in 1978.

The Italian and British press have debated whether the sunglasses he sports are by Gucci or Serengeti. And Rocco Palmo, an American pope-blogger who also writes for the British Catholic journal The Tablet, claims several sources have told him that, when the Pope is home alone in the Apartment, he puts on a blue tracksuit.

It is tempting to say, “Wow, here is a Joseph Ratzinger we never knew.” The clothes clues, however, are not solid. The camaulda and mozetta are rumoured to be gifts from two European princesses. His optician says someone probably also gave him the sunglasses. Father Frauenlob laughs off the tracksuit report.

After addressing a recent meeting of the Curia's 1,500 bureaucrats, Benedict shook the hands of those seated in the first row, and then left. John Paul II, a Curia official noted, would have shaken the hands of everyone in the first 200 rows.

John Paul, the former actor, was a man of dramatic gestures. “I can't imagine Benedict going like this with his hands,” says the Curia official, imitating the late pope. “I'd be embarrassed.”

Indeed, when Benedict does make a gesture with his hands, it looks as if he has read it in a script.

John Paul never saw a mass audience he didn't love. Benedict thoroughly dislikes them, Father Frauenlob says.

Pope John XXIII, within the first 100 days of his papacy, had decided to convene the Second Vatican Council that overhauled the church. Paul VI, within his first 100 days, had made an unprecedented trip to the Holy Land. And John Paul II, in his first 100 days, had made a triumphant visit to his Polish homeland and declared his support for the Polish free trade union, Solidarity — helping to crack the foundations of the Communist Iron Curtain across Eastern Europe.

Benedict moved his library of 20,000 books to the Apartment from the Borgo Pio flat in which he had lived for 24 years.

He has written an encyclical on love, to mixed reviews. Scarcely anyone in the Vatican knew what it was about until it was being translated — “which already offers you a very different framework from how things were done before,” Prof. Contreras notes.

And he has, as predicted, walked steadfastly in John Paul's footsteps in his moral and theological pronouncements, as is the convention.

Contrary to predictions, he has not torn the Curia apart. He has merely tinkered with it. He has merged four minor departments into two and reassigned Archbishop Michael Fitzgerald to be papal ambassador to Egypt.

Archbishop Fitzgerald, a Briton, is the Vatican's Islamic expert. He had been president of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue — until it disappeared in the departmental shuffle.

In the Vatican's current climate, the tinkerings have been seen darkly: They're considered the harbinger of Benedict's long-awaited Curia axe, with Archbishop Fitzgerald's transfer taken as a demotion for being “soft” on Islam.

But a senior bureaucrat, who knows the Pope well from his own Curia days, dismisses the speculations.

“This so-called Curia revolution, how could it be a No. 1 priority? It is, after all, the smallest bureaucracy in the world. It is not what the papacy is about. He's not a CEO. He's spiritual leader of 1.1 billion Catholics.

“As for Fitzgerald? They don't punish people like that in public. It would put the Holy See in an embarrassing position. Besides which, the Pope has never been a vindictive man.”

So how to assess Benedict's first year in charge? One hears ubiquitously that the tradition in Germany is for a new pastor of a church to do nothing in his first year other than walk the same path as his predecessor — observe, analyze, but make no changes.

It is said that this is what Joseph Ratzinger did in his first year as archbishop of Munich, and what he did in his first year as prefect of the CDF. It is also repeatedly pointed out that he is a scholar, and that scholars never take precipitate actions: First they study, then they assess, and only then do they act.

Says the official not fond of Bavarian bands: “He hasn't had a defining event land in his lap yet. They're not created. They land. What will it be? I don't know. It might be Islamic, but I don't know. There's got to be an event that provokes.”

Or something broader, grander, something that takes us back to the Vatican official looking at the crowds on St. Peter's Square, and asking: “Why are they there?”

The crowds at Benedict's weekly audiences are puzzling. As one academic at a Roman university observes, the novelty of a new Pope should have worn off by now. The crowds have been called the biggest surprise to date of Benedict's papacy.

People came to see John Paul. But perhaps, speculates Congolese theologian Juvénal Illunga Muya, a professor at the Pontifical Urbaniana University, they come to hear Benedict.

But hear what? His workaday homilies are more comprehensible than the dense philosophical circumlocutions of John Paul, but hardly dramatic departures from past papal idiom.

However, there is the sermon he preached at his papal inauguration — presenting the world with a dark portrait of humanity lost in a desert of corruption, loneliness, abandonment and destroyed love.

And there is also the homily he preached to his fellow cardinals in St. Peter's before they filed into the Sistine Chapel to elect him Pope — an eloquent warning: “We are moving toward a dictatorship of relativism which does not recognize anything as definitive and has as its highest value one's own ego and one's own desires.”

These are messages Hans Küng notes. He taught with Prof. Ratzinger many years ago at the University of Tübingen. It was Archbishop Ratzinger of Munich who was the first church official to publicly rebuke him. And there seems no doubt that Cardinal Ratzinger was involved in the decision to revoke Prof. Küng's licence to teach Catholic theology.

When Pope Benedict XVI's election was announced, Prof. Küng called it a disappointment for Catholics who had hoped for change from John Paul.

Still, in the interview this week, he said he is happy that Benedict has chosen not to be “a media pope” — that he is not travelling, that he is reflecting and that he has prudently not followed an aggressive policy of evangelism.

The two former colleagues met last September in Rome, their first meeting in years. It was later spun by the Vatican as a sign that Prof. Küng's differences with the former Prof. Ratzinger were eroding.

“That's too simplistic,” Prof. Küng said. “There was an agreement [beforehand] that we exclude from conversation our very different opinions — on the Pill, on celibacy of priests, on Eucharistic unity with Protestants — and concentrate on the big problems, like Christian faith and science, the evolution of the cosmos, on life and humanity.”

They also spoke at length — the meeting lasted four hours — on what Prof. Küng called “the best way of pushing the ethical imperatives” in a secular world.

He said of his old adversary: “He sees better than his predecessor the façade of the church.”

Benedict's first year assessed.

As for the façade of the Benediktweg, and the Bavarian cash registers waiting for pilgrims, elementary-school teacher Hubert Gschwendtner — who has been mayor of Marktl Am Inn for the past 10 years — sits at his dining-room table one afternoon and tells the story of his efforts to rein in excessive commercial enthusiasm.

Choosing his words carefully, he says the initial euphoria in the village over Benedict's election rather quickly led to what he described as a decline in the quality of merchandise being offered in local shops, and the quiet warning from the Vatican about papal personality cults.

“We had no control over what was being sold,” Mr. Gschwendtner says. “We are not the police. We have a free-market economy. So it was a question of appealing to retailers to sell only what would be in good taste.”

Asked for an example of bad taste, he responds: “Everything marketed by the butcher.”

One almost doesn't want to know.

In any event, pope sausages came off the market. And the brewers of papst-bier agreed to remove Benedict's face from the bottle labels and replace it with something saying simply, “Greetings from Marktl.”

Still, a few hundred metres from the village square, Otto Brandstetter stands serenely amid his souvenir-shop stock of Benedict busts, Benedict umbrellas and Benedict flowerpots.

He declares business to be “very satisfactory.” The crucifix cookies and mitre pastries are selling well in the bakery.

And Mayor Gschwendtner tells the story of his personal Pope coup — pulled off flawlessly last summer, when Benedict went to Cologne for Catholic World Youth Day.

Learning the Pope would be flying back to Rome aboard the German national airline Lufthansa, Mr. Gschwendtner had a town official call the airline to see if the plane could do a low dip over Marktl as it went by. Lufthansa readily agreed.

Mr. Gschwendtner then organized a media-publicized street party in the square beside the Pope's birth house. He arranged for the whole of the central village to be lit up brilliantly, and he brought in a sound truck.

As the Pope's plane neared Marktl and lowered its altitude, Mr. Gschwendtner put in a call to the pilot. He put Benedict on the phone, and the Pope gave a blessing to the town that was broadcast through the truck.

The payoff was a visit to the village several days later by the Lufthansa crew. They arrived bringing the aircraft seat on which the papal posterior had reposed. It is now bolted onto the floor in the mayor's office.

He says, “I don't want it turned into a relic.”

Michael Valpy is a senior writer for The Globe and Mail.

[Modificato da benefan 15/04/2006 16.49]

TERESA BENEDETTA
Saturday, April 15, 2006 7:48 PM
IN MY OPINION...
Of course, Benefan, you knew I wouldn't be able to resist reacting! Mr. Valpy's piece is too scattershot and badly organized ,but on the whole, not as bad as it might have been, so it doesn't merit a full fisking.

However, for all the obvious physical effort that he put into it - travelling to Traunstein and Marktl to get some interviews, even - he ends up with a piece called "The Pope nobody knows". Because he starts and ends with an obvious bias and/or a conclusion that, to him, is self-evident: "I really don't know what to conclude about this Pope, and I really don't want to, so I'll call him the Pope nobody knows. That way, I don't have to make a judgment one way or the other."

His bias is evident in his choice of the two men from whose point of view he chooses to frame his article - the unnamed Curia official who disdains Bavarian brass bands, and Hans Kueng. Hardly objective witnesses to use as measuring sticks!

The disapproving Curia official should take a heavy dose of laxative and relieve his congested sphincters - he never heard of joy in life?

And if after 12 months, he still has "no idea where this Pontificate is going," he has deliberately stopped up his sensory orifices as well. Even the young people at Cologne caught it - "This Pope is bringing us back to the basics." And the Pope said very clearly, "Not my will, but what God wills for His Church. The Church will listen, I will listen."

And this person asks about the crowds at St. Peter's, "Why are they here?" Whether the question was asked in disdain or in puzzlement (I suspect the first), how can any priest quibble that the faithful come to church? He should celebrate every single person who comes to St. Peter's, because whatever reason brought them there, they will come away with some sense of why this Church has stood for 2000 years.

Mr. Kalpy himself finds the crowds "puzzling." They are a puzzle only if one persists in the bias that "Ratzinger is so not charismatic at all - how can he possibly attract crowds?" Answer: a) He is the Pope - everyone wants to see the Pope. b) Has anyone noticed that he happens to be a very attractive man with a most engaging public personality? HELLO!!! c) John Paul II did not corner the market in charisma.

Further, he says of John Paul II, "What did he leave behind that is built on a rock?" It's the Church, stupid! (Pardon my using a commonplace turn of phrase - it's not meant to be rude int his context, just exasperated.) It's what every Pope leaves behind after having had it, by definition, in custody. The rock has withstood centuries of anti-Christian assault, and it will continue to do so.

On Kueng saying that behind the ornate trappings of the Vatican, "The Church's life is very poor" - It is only poor for those who do not want to see the richness of the faith that only waits to be lived.

Now, Hans Kueng for all his intellect is only human. One must consider all his negative remarks about Benedict and the Church in the context of an intellectual who has been lionized in the media for the past four decades or more; who, during that time, was media's shining knight held up as the foil to his contemporary and 'rival' theologian Joseph Ratzinger, who was painted as the Panzerkardinal and even less flattering images. And now, Kueng finds himself just another intellectual with media clout, whereas his former "rival' is now the supreme moral authority on the globe, and one moreover, whose fine intellect and consistent perceptive thinking is earning new admirers daily. So, no, I wouldn't use Hans Kueng as a frame of reference to evaluate Benedict XVI as Pope!

Finally, Mr. Kalpy laments, or quotes another unnamed Vatican official to that effect, that there has been "no defining event" in the first 12 months of this Papacy. He means by this events like John XXIII convening Vatican-II during his first 100 days as Pope, Pope Paul VI visiting the Holy Land as one of his earliest big acts, and John Paul II's first visit to Poland.

So he really means "dramatic gesture", not defining event. Indeed, he almost mockingly says that in comparison, during his first 100 days, Pope Benedict only managed to move his personal library into the Vatican.

You want "defining event" in terms of literally defining something? Everyone pretty much agrees that the homily he gave at his inaugural Mass was Benedict's clear and eloquent definition of his intentions. [Add to that his holiday address to the Roman Curia in which he restated very clearly what he blieves Vatican-II really means.]

You want "defining event" in terms of overturning the media image of an unlikable, unapproachable, utterly uncharismatic Pope? Think of Cologne in August 2005. That turned out to be not only a spectacular event in every way, despite a Pope who has no inclination for spectacle. It was also a highly significant event in the life of the Church and for the millions of young people around the world who came to know a new "father" who did not come to wag a finger at them but to urge them to be God's revolutionaries.

You want 'defining event' in terms of showing the world Benedict as he "really" is, insofar as that is possible? Think of his encounter with the children of the First Communion and the more recent one with older youth - and how simply and effectively he answered questions that ranged from a child's "How can I believe something I do not see?" to an older youth's "How can I reconcile faith and science?"

Of course, for an admirer of the Pope like me, every event in which he takes part is a defining event, because each and every episode defines him and his Papacy. And the best dramatic gestures are those that are not planned or programmed. Benedict did not stop to kiss the ground in Cologne, but he prostrated himself yesterday before the Cross in St. Peter's. That is "drama" without frills. As eloquent as his gesture in immediately turning away after he delivered his brief unscripted homily at the end of the Via Crucis last night.

My final comment: The writer quotes Fr. Frauenlob from Traunstein as saying that the Pope "thoroughly dislikes crowds." I hope the good father was misquoted! Can anyone of you imagine Joseph Ratzinger telling anyone, "You know what? I just thoroughly dislike crowds!" or "I can't stand crowds!" or "Please, keep me away from a crowd!" One only has to watch his reactions when the crowds at St. Peter's acclaim him (or the pictures of him with the faithful when he was Archbishop of Munich) to know that although he does not court them or pander to them, he enjoys popular demonstration of support and affection (or at the very least, of interest by their very presence) as much as any man would.

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 15/04/2006 22.32]

TERESA BENEDETTA
Saturday, April 15, 2006 10:57 PM
'WHY I LIKE POPE BENEDICT XVI'
Thanks to Emma in the main forum for posting the original article from this week's issue of - an unexpected source - Vanity Fair, Italian edition. Now, if only she could scan and post the photographs that are in the same issue, according to this article! Here is a translation-
----------------------------------------------------------------

On April 19, 2005, Joseph Ratzinger was elected Pope. He had the unenviable task of succeeding to Karol Wojtyla, “a giant, not only of the Church and of world history, but also of media visibility.” One year later, we asked a journalist and Catholic writer to “play” at comparing the two Popes: their attitudes, their actions, their words. The result? Surprising!



BENEDICT: A POPE WE DID NOT EXPECT
By Michele Brambilla

“Some Popes are a gift from Providence, others are supported by Providence, still others are inflicted by Providence.” This is a saying attributed to a saint and much quoted by the Lefebvrians, those Catholic traditionalists who dispute the validity of Vatican-II and who isolated themselves in Econe, Switzerland. They are followers of the late Bishop Marcel Lefebvre (1905-1991), who was suspended as a bishop in 1976 and excommunicated in 1988 when he ordained 4 bishops, thereby arrogating to himself a Papal prerogative.

Other Catholics who are even more traditionalist – more to the right, we would say today, to use a term which is as much abused as it is inadequate – go farther and claim that there are Popes, who despite having been elected Pope, are not truly Pope. They maintain that such Popes are unworthy of being Sucbessors to Peter and therefore do not deserve to be recognized as Pope. Worse - they are not recognized by God. They were elected spuriously in some kind of electoral machination devised by the very devil himself. So they say.

Such fringe Catholics claim that the last Pope who was elected in a “regular” manner – namely, with celestial blessing - was John XXIII . But that Pope then made the error of convening Vatican-II, and from then on, the Roman Church went off the tracks completely! For them (who are effectively outside the Church), the seat of Peter was been vacant since Vatican-II. They are also called sedevacantistas from the Italian words for vacant seat, Sede Vacante a term normally used to indicate the time between the death of one Pope and the election of the next one.

This lengthy premise leads up to this: Very often – and more often now than before – Popes are assigned an index of approval, labelled with various convenient classifications (“conservative” and “progressive” have been the most recurrent in the past several decades), or graded as in a report card.

Without coming down to the extremists like the Lefebvrians and the sedevacantistas, even “normal” Catholics (for want of a better term) as well as non-believers and the public in general, end up comparing one Pope to another. And such comparisons have never been more forthcoming than around this time, one year since the death of Karol Wojtyla and the election of Joseph Ratzinger.

It was inevitable. John Paul II was a giant, not just in the Church and in world history, but also of high-visibility in modern mass media. A Pope who filled the eyes of the world and the thoughts of billions. How can anyone resist the temptation of seeing whether his successor is at all anywhere near him? How can one fail to see eventual affinities and inevitable differences?

The very beautiful photographs in this issue of Vanity Fair suggest this to us directly: a comparison of the Polish Pope and the German Pope, an analysis of how they are alike and how they differ.

I have agreed to join this game, and I use the term deliberately. It should not be more than a game, otherwise it becomes a lethal trap – that of trying to establish whether one is a better person [piu bravo] than the other, or worse, whether one is a better Pope than the other.

Such comparisons can be made of prime ministers, presidents, politicians. Not Popes. Later, I will explain why not. Later, because in the meantime, I promised to play this game and so I will begin by analyzing their differences.

OK. At the risk of being unpopular, I must be honest: I like Ratzinger better. [A me, sta piu simpatico Ratzinger]. I just like him better. He is more reserved, more sensitive, more gentle, despite his undeserved reputation as a surly censor. One only needs to observe him when he looks into the eyes, one on one, of the people he meets.

Vittorio Messori was right when he wrote recently that Wojtyla directed himself to the masses, to the crowd, whereas Ratzinger is a one-on-one person. These are two different modes of behavior.

Personally I like the style of Benedict VXI better, perhaps because I always have in mind an illuminating remark by a writer I love, Giovannino Guareschi: “No one goes to hell or to heaven in a committee.” Which means that “the people” refers to an indistinct mass, whereas actually, that mass is composed on individual I’s.

In the second place, each Pope has his own story which marks him. Joseph Ratzinger has always been a scholar: cultured, reflexive. Karol Wojtyla as a young man was an actor, and he never lost the ability to perform. Even when, as newly-elected Pope, he appeared before the crowd and said: “I do not know if I can express myself well in your...our Italian language.” I thought then that the “your-our” correction seemed somewhat “prepared”, a special effect (I mean it without offense) to please the crowd.

On the other hand, I found it very moving when a highly emotional Ratzinger – him, the great theologian! – actually made a theological error when, during his own first speech to the world, he said: “The Lord will help us, and Mary His Most Holy Mother, will be on His right”, which he corrected immediately to say, “will be on our side.”

Later, John Paul II was unfortunately given bad advice on certain occasions. Examples: They named the Press Hall of the Vatican for him; or he allowed a two-meter statue of him to be erected in Poland; or when he was advised to call in a professional writer to help him write an autobiographical book.

Certainly, Karol Wojtyla had great charisma which was overwhelming. But honorific naming of places or erection of statues are better done after a person has left the scene, and in the case of a Pope, it would have been preferable not to feed the cult of personality in this way, because a Pope, whoever he is, is the ”servant of the servants of God,” not a celebrity.

In the magazine of Corriere della Sera recently, Vittorio Messori was quite severe on this count with John Paul II, and Antonio Socci in Libero replied that the criticism was ungenerous because some image problems and mistakes should not be attributed to the Pope who, despite everything, was a heroic witness for Christ. Although Messori is my friend, I am more on Socci’s side in this argument.

But let me proceed – seeing as I have accepted to play this game of “differences” which is not at all a comparison of merits – with explaining why I like Papa Ratzinger so much. I like him not only for his manner but for what he says. Now, I am not saying that, in substance, Wojtyla said different things. Not at all. But as Joaquin Navarro-Valls, spokesman for both Popes, said: “John Paul II’s pontificate was one of gestures, that of Benedict XVI will be a Papacy of thoughts.”

Ratzinger speaks to us in an extraordinary way not for “how” he says things but for what he says. A few weeks back, Ernesto Gallo dalla Loggia [philosopher, historian and magazine editor, who has faced Ratzinger in a public debate on whether God exists] said he was amazed that one year since his death, altmost no one cites John Paul’s speeches anymore, his magisterium.

I think the reason is that what remains most vivid about Wojtyla was the heroic testimony of his life. Which is, obviously, more important than any number of speeches. A Christian mystic of the first century said, “You can always answer one theory with another; but who can dispute a life?”

Wojtyla was a great man and a great Pope for his testimony, for the exceptional courage with which he brought the Gospel to every corner of the world and with which he denounced horrors and errors of whatever origin or color.

Let me explain to those who are too young to remember or to know: In the 1970s, the Church – especially in Europe, including Italy – appeared to be falling apart, Christians seemed restricted to the churches, and those who did go out into the world were almost ashamed to say they were Christian and sought to adapt the Gospel to the fashion of the moment in order not to feel cut off from contemporary society.

Karol Wojtyla was, for my generation
(I was not yet 20 when he became Pope), the Pope who shook us out of that torpor. Who made us proud to be Christians, who made us understand that the Gospel is not a cage but a liberation. He announced loudly to the world that there is a sense to life, he gave us hope, he showed us a goal. And so let us not harp on the personality cult that gradually grew and consolidated about him, with some excesses, up to the exhibition of his illness in the last years. He was a very great Pope. And for believers, a saint.

But now, probably – for the believer, the designs of God are mysterious and inacessible to our poor minds – a different Pope is needed. Less gestures, less personal witness, but more content. This is one of the reasons why I said that I am very fascinated by Papa Ratzinger. Because this man is telling us extraordinary things, things that allow the emergence in all its power of the beauty of Christianity.

Allow me to say this: Five speeches (let us call them that, although the church calls them something else) given by Joseph Ratzinger between February and April 2005 are among the most elevated discourses that have ever come out of the Catholic Church in the past 50 years.

I will cite them in chronological order, pointing out that the first 4 were given by Ratzinger before he became Pope: 1) the homily at the funeral of Don Giussani at the Cathedral of Milan; 2) the meditations on the Way of the Cross; 3) the homily at John Paul II’s funeral; 4) the homily at the opening Mass of the Concalve; and 5) his inaugural homily as Pope.

At a time when, alas!, preaching seems to have been reduced to an obsessive repetition of moral norms, ranging from commonplaces about solidarity to instructions on how to behave in bed, Joseph Ratzinger, in those 5 speeches, managed to shake us up, reminding us that Christianity is not an ethic but the celebration of an event: that God be came man, died for us and rose again, and that even for us, life does not end here. All the rest – including moral behavior – are a consequence of that fact, not premises.

If you can, go back and reread those speeches and you will see how Ratzinger, I repeat this, keeps showing us, above all, the beauty of Christianity. Even his first encyclical, Deus caritas est, follows that orientation: God is not a policeman, God is love. “He who does not love does not know God, because God is love.”

Anything but a stick-rapping moralist, Ratzinger even exalts all the dignity of erotic love, but he also makes it clear that eros without agape (the love in which one gives oneself to the other) risks being nothing but self-love, pure satisfaction of one’s own desires.

Why do I like Benedict XVI’s manner of speaking? Because he is not dogmatic. Rather, he rationalizes moral indications. He doesn’t simply say: do this! He explains, he talks to the modern mind, which is rational by training.

So I think the differences between Wojtyla and Ratzinger are differences of style, of character and of culture. Not of substance.

Woe betide a Catholic to say that one Pope is better than another. The Church has had Popes who were morally unworthy of the office, but not even they ever said or wrote anythng heretical, nothing against the faith. The believer sees in this an ongoing mystery: whoever is on Peter’s Chair, whoever he is, shows himself to be a servant of the Gospel, not its master, and therefore, a servant of the truth. And that is why a Catholic cannot compare the Popes or rank them.

The Pope is the Pope. Even if he were a mediocre personality, or even someone unlikable, the believer sees in him the Vicar of Christ. The crowd that acclaims a man robed in white who faces them from the balcony of St. Peter’s is not acclaiming the man himself, but that which he stands for. Whoever he is, that man is acclaimed and loved because he gives us the words of eternal life.


Then again, Providence has a hand even in details. Maybe in 1978, a Pope like Wojtyla was needed, just as in 2005, a Pope like Ratzinger is.

Allow me to close with a remark by Umberto Bossi, who is not Catholic, but whatever culture he may represent, he has perceived a reality that simple people of faith have always known: “When it comes to a Pope, the Church always gets it right.”

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 16/04/2006 0.37]

TERESA BENEDETTA
Sunday, April 16, 2006 12:34 AM
JOHN ALLEN: THE BENEDICT XVI FILE
From www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/living/14344753.htm

Vatican vetter:
The Benedict XVI File

Expert provides unique perspective
on Pope’s first year
By BILL TAMMEUS
The Kansas City Star



Pope Benedict greets John Allen at the Vatican.

“I think sociologically there is no Catholic Church in the United States. What you have are multiple Catholicisms. And the question really facing Benedict, as far as the American church is concerned, is how do you bring those tribes into conversation.” — John L. Allen Jr.

When Joseph Ratzinger was elected Pope Benedict XVI a year ago next week, his stern reputation led people to expect a hard-line enforcer of Catholic doctrine.

That, after all, had been his job as a cardinal working closely with Pope John Paul II, who died April 2, 2005. But instead of acting like “God’s Rottweiler,” as he was known, Benedict has come across as open, friendly and even a little kicky — an apt description for a guy who wears red Prada shoes under his robes.

To get an insider’s assessment of Benedict’s first year, The Kansas City Star interviewed John L. Allen Jr., Rome correspondent for the Kansas City-based National Catholic Reporter and commentator for CNN. [Necessarily, some of Allen's answers we have read in previous articles or talks that he himself has written or given recently.]

Allen was here recently to visit the NCR staff and promote his new book, Opus Dei, about that controversial Catholic organization. His responses have been edited for length and clarity.

Tell us about the pope’s first year.
The big story is what hasn’t happened. There were these expectations that we would be saying Mass in Latin. There would be this great flushing sound, as all the dissidents were drummed out of the church. Obviously none of that has happened.

There’s nobody who has a deeper sense of the church’s tradition than he does. And that imposes a kind of caution, a slowness about any kind of change.

And I think the other thing that those of us who covered him on a daily basis understood is that he makes a very sharp distinction between what he would consider to be matters of faith and morals, and everything else. He really is remarkably consultative, remarkably open. He wants to listen and act on the basis of consensus.

That has meant that the only really serious public criticism of the pope actually has come from the Catholic right. A prominent American conservative told me, “We thought we were electing Ronald Reagan, and we got stuck with Jimmy Carter.” I think that’s due to the fact that a lot of people were expecting immediate and dramatic change.

At the end of John Paul’s first year, it was very clear where he was going. There was a very robust reassertion of Catholic identity after a period of modernization.

One year into Benedict, the big difference in public reaction is between those who are paying attention and those who aren’t. The truth is that people who are papal aficionados … by and large are very impressed. He’s incredibly erudite and an extremely talented communicator. He’s actually popular with the public. He draws big crowds.

However, very little of that has penetrated to the broader public radar screen. I think if you talked to the average Catholic in Kansas City and asked, “What do you think of the new pope?” they probably could tell you he put out something on gay priests and they heard that he wears Prada shoes. And that’s about the only impression they have.

What was your reaction to Benedict’s first encyclical, God Is Love?
The document has two sections. The first is this philosophical and spiritual meditation on love. The second is a more concrete examination of the world’s Catholic charitable institutions.

The first section is entirely his work. And if you want a clue into his mind, that’s where you go. The final section is more of a committee thing. My analysis is that basically the guy understands that the church in many ways for a modern 21st-century technical world has got an unpopular message. Its message on gay marriage, on abortion, the nature of the family —these are all things that a lot of people just have a hard time buying.

He understands that part of the reason people don’t buy it is that they see it as a power-based legalism. To these people, the church is a defensive institution afraid of modernity.

I think the encyclical was an attempt to change the terms of the debate. That is, “You may not agree with the specific conclusions we have, but at least give us credit for our intentions. I mean, we’re not telling you these things because we want to control you; we’re telling you these things because we want you to experience real happiness and real love. We want to set you free to be the kind of people God intended you to be, and you’ll experience the kind of love that lasts.”

It certainly doesn’t mark any retreat from his position on these issues. (But) you don’t change hearts and minds through excoriation. If you’re going to persuade people, the first thing you have to do is be a credible witness to love. That’s what the encyclical was meant to be.


Talk about how the estrangement of the American church from the Vatican might be affected by Benedict.
So far I don’t think the dynamic has changed very much. Those elements in the American church that were estranged from John Paul II are, to some extent, just holding their breath now. Some even cautiously say they like some of what they’ve seen.

But I think most of them are convinced that this is the eye of the storm. Conversely I think those people who were really cheered by John Paul II certainly think Benedict’s got his heart in the right place, though they’ve been a little disappointed he hasn’t been more aggressive.

The thing to remember is that when we talk about American Catholicism, we’re talking about 67 million people. It’s unbelievably complex.

Certainly under John Paul II, those most attracted to the priesthood tended to be more conservative theologically.

But as for the generation that’s 26, 27, 28, my impression is that the left-right categories just don’t work in trying to analyze where they’re coming from. Yeah, they do have a higher sense of the ordained priesthood. They’re suspicious of democratization. They’re certainly very committed to the teaching of the church right down the line.

But they are also very committed to the social doctrine of the church. That then begins to look liberal. They’re very committed to John Paul’s style of meeting people in the street, evangelization, speaking their language, none of which was the traditional clerical way of behaving.

The problem in the American church is not so much that it’s polarized between left and right. The problem is that we’ve got Catholic tribes.

We’ve got the liturgical traditionalists, the charismatics, the neo-cons, the social justice people, the church reform people. And they move in their own little self-contained circles. They go to their own conferences, read their own publications, have their own heroes. And very rarely do they step out of those little ghettos and encounter one another.

I think sociologically there is no Catholic Church in the United States. What you have are multiple Catholicisms. And the question really facing Benedict, as far as the American church is concerned, is how do you bring those tribes into conversation
. And I don’t think there’s any magical solution.

But, to be honest, the kind of conversation we’re having right now is going to be increasingly irrelevant in the global Catholic scene, given the fact that most Catholics in the world today live in the global South — it’s 800 million of about 1.1 billion.

Americans are 6 percent of the global Catholic population, and we will decline as the rest of the world increases. So this split between left and right — the bishops from Africa or Asia don’t have much tolerance for it. It’s just not a problem that they recognize.

Their problems are much more basic: Two-thirds of their people are HIV-positive. Three-quarters of their people live on less than $2 a day. They’re dealing with corrupt governments.


The growth of Christianity in the Southern Hemisphere is not happening just in Catholicism.
Oh, all across the board. Sure. But the Catholic Church is international by design. Which means that Protestant Christianity in Africa can just do its own thing without much reference to the rest of the world. But inevitably what goes on there in some long-run sense does involve Catholics because all of a sudden bishops from the African church are sitting in Vatican offices and affecting policy and making documents that also apply to us.

Americans — especially these people who feel most disenfranchised — are going to cut less and less ice. I would say that for American Catholic liberals, what I’m calling the upside-down church — the church that was driven by the North and now will be driven by the South — is going to be great news on peace and justice issues, but it’s going to be a tremendously hard sell for them on things like lay empowerment and sexual morality, because if you think the Catholic Church is a little rigid now, wait until the shots are being called by Asia, Latin America and Africa.

Benedict has said some progressive things about interfaith dialogue. Is he likely to continue John Paul’s work on better interfaith relations?

Benedict clearly is committed to continuing the dialogue with other religions. On the other hand, I would say that Islam is actually one of the few areas of contrasts between Benedict and John Paul.

John Paul basically was a dove when it comes to Islam. He met with Muslims more than 60 times, was the first pope to enter a mosque, and his approach was, broadly speaking, to reach out to moderates, to never say anything inflammatory or derogatory or provocative if he could avoid it.


That was the dove agenda. But it stuck in the craw of a lot of people in the church who felt we have to practice something more akin to tough love, especially around issues of reciprocity.

To give you a specific example: If Saudi Arabia’s government can come into Rome and spend $65 million to put up the largest mosque in Europe, which they did, protected and supported by the city of Rome, then maybe the church should be able to build churches in Saudi Arabia, which it can’t.

I think we’re getting a more hawkish line. Not that he’s going to shut down dialogue. Not that he doesn’t want good relations. But he’s not going to do it at the expense of what he would see as truth.

If I were going to make a list of substantive changes between the papacy of John Paul II and Benedict XVI, this would be somewhere near the top of the list
.

Will this change be effective?
It’s hard to say. But what this will do is make those Catholics who are frustrated by all this feel better. A lot of people feel that the analogy is the church’s relationship with the Soviets. Under John XXIII and Paul VI, the dove line predominated. And it didn’t seem to change anything. Then John Paul came along with a much stronger challenge, and the walls literally came tumbling down.

If people who are upset at the church were Protestants like me, they might break off into another church.
Right. And that may be the choice some people make. Some have. The schism in the Catholic left is a multiphase process. First there’s an internal schism, where you just walk around cursing people and (ticked) off at authority, even though you’re going to church on Sunday.

Then you self-select to be in a “progressive” parish, therefore reinforcing you in that choice, and you become even more alienated. Then what a lot of these people do is to spin off into another religious community, like becoming an Episcopalian.

The Catholic right, when it goes into schism, it announces it. It finds a bishop.

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 16/04/2006 0.49]

Questa è la versione 'lo-fi' dell Comunità Per visualizzare la versione completa click here
Tutti gli orari sono GMT+01:00. Adesso sono le 11:49 PM.
Copyright © 2000-2012 FreeForumZone snc - www.freeforumzone.com