Funny, isn't it, how certain experts and leaders of other religions are so eager to explain to Pope Benedict XVI how to really be a pope? Of course, their "arguments" and statements can also make you wonder why they are considered experts or gained positions of leadership. A shining example is this piece in today's Baltimore Sun. First up, the former editor of America magazine:
"I think his problem is that he's a German academic who hasn't realized yet he's a pope," said the Rev. Thomas J. Reese of the Woodstock Theological Center at Georgetown University. "There's certain things that an academic can say and have intellectual, unemotional discussions of. ... He's an extremely bright man, but he doesn't have any street smarts."
Next, a professor of history:
"He's not as political or diplomatic as was John Paul II," said Frank J. Coppa, a professor of history at St. John's University in New York. "He's more theologically oriented than he is diplomatically oriented."
Then a communications director:
"When you compare his efforts to reach out to the Muslims to those of the previous pope, there's a lot to be desired," said Ibrahim Hooper, national communications director of the Council of American-Islamic Relations. "We hope that the incident is not a signal of things yet to come. "Unfortunately, these most recent remarks are harming relations that were built up over years."
The chairman of the "theology" department at Georgetown University, which has a mysterious, even vague, relationship with the Catholic Church:
"His lenses are very thickly Christian in terms of how he views the world," Gillis said. Although "Benedict is a very distinguished Christian theologian," Gillis said, "he's not an expert on the history of religions."
Then this advice from a rabbi:
Rabbi Jack Bemporad of the Center for Interreligious Understanding, said the new pope has been forced to look beyond his previous "narrow kind of job." "He really had to understand the broader aspects of what being pope was," Bemporad said.
So, let's summarize so far:
• Benedict doesn't realize he is pope. This is because Germans, especially German academics (as opposed to American academics), have a hard time comprehending that they were actually elected pope. Whether this is due to excessive stupidity or humility is not clear.
• Benedict doesn't have "street smarts," which is to say, I'm guessing, that he never was the editor of America magazine.
• He's not political enough, and is too "theologically oriented." And when it comes to the spiritual leadership of a billion Christians, that simply won't do.
• He's not John Paul II. And we know that everyone — and I mean everyone — loved everything that John Paul II ever said or did. I dare you to find proof to the contrary.
• He's too Christian in his thinking. Again, this won't make the cut when it comes to being pope. A pope today really must be a pope of all people; he must a Hindu pope, a Muslim pope, a Jewish pope, an atheist pope.
• He's not an expert on the history of religions. This, again, from the chairman of the "theology" department at Georgetown. Take it or leave it.
• His work as head of the CDF was so narrow, he's having difficulty understanding what it means to be pope. As for the fact that he has been a priest for over fifty years, was a theological expert at Vatican II, one of the greatest Catholic (nay, Christian) theologians of the 20th century, an archbishop, and a high-ranking Vatican leader, and one of John Paul II's trusted advisors. Well, that's nice, but he's going to have to stop focusing on Christian theology and ideas. Who does he think he is, the pope?!
Finally, the truth does start to come out toward the end of the article:
There have been other missteps in his past, Coppa said. As prefect, the future pope "had some explaining to do" after publication of the declaration Dominus Iesus, which argued that the path to salvation was through Jesus Christ.
"When you're dealing in ecumenical dialogue, you try to focus on the points you have in common rather than how you differ from each other," Coppa said.
Ah ha! So perhaps, just perhaps, the problem is that some of the Catholic experts interviewed by the Sun have a problem with Benedict being, well, too Catholic and too hung up on the whole Jesus is Lord thing. First, dialogue with Muslims is not "ecumenical dialogue," which is limited to dialogue among Christians; it is more properly known as interreligious dialogue. Secondly, Coppa's understanding of ecumenical and interreligious dialogue is faulty. Consider the words of the Holy Father:
First, they are silent about Christ: the kingdom of which they speak is "theocentrically" based, since, according to them, Christ cannot be understood by those who lack Christian faith, whereas different peoples, cultures and religions are capable of finding common ground in the one divine reality, by whatever name it is called. For the same reason they put great stress on the mystery of creation, which is reflected in the diversity of cultures and beliefs, but they keep silent about the mystery of redemption. Furthermore, the kingdom, as they understand it, ends up either leaving very little room for the Church or undervaluing the Church in reaction to a presumed "ecclesiocentrism" of the past, and because they consider the Church herself only a sign, for that matter a sign not without ambiguity.
That, by the way, was the late Holy Father, Pope John Paul II, from his encyclical Redemptoris Missio. Another helpful quote from the same document:
Those engaged in this dialogue must be consistent with their own religious traditions and convictions, and be open to understanding those of the other party without pretense or close-mindedness, but with truth, humility and frankness, knowing that dialogue can enrich each side. There must be no abandonment of principles nor false irenicism, but instead a witness given and received for mutual advancement on the road of religious inquiry and experience, and at the same time for the elimination of prejudice, intolerance and misunderstandings.
"Truth, humility, and frankness." To me, that summarizes very well the work of Benedict XVI. It is others who seem to be practicing the "abandonment of principles" and "false irenicism".
Finally, it is only right to end on a positive note, provided by a somewhat (to my mind) surprising, but welcome, source:
Cardinal William H. Keeler of Baltimore, a member of an interreligious committee of the United States Conference of Bishops who is known for his outreach to the Jewish community, wrote yesterday in response to some of the criticism that "it should be clear that rather than being a critical analysis of Islam, [Pope Benedict's] address invites us all to reject violence as a way of solving problems. ... For the discerning reader, Pope Benedict offers his plea for reconciliation and peace in terms both scholarly and persuasive."




































































































As someone put it so well in another blog:
I'm eagerly awaiting all the Historico-Critico apparachik at Notre Dame et al, such as Richard McBrien to launch into a tirade about how the Koran is not literally true, about how Islam should allow women to be muftis and about how Mohammed was not literally assumed into heaven and all that angel Gabriel stuff was metaphorical and not literal.
Posted by: Plato's Stepchild | Wednesday, September 20, 2006 at 09:33 AM
"His (B16's) lenses are very thickly Christian in terms of how he views the world," Gillis said.
Interesting metaphor, but what does it mean - that B16 needs special glasses in order to view the world in a Christian way? and that he uses especialy thick glasses meaning he can't view the Christian world without special aids?
More likely he means that B16 is incapable of seeing things from a perspective
other than his own. But why not just say that B16 is a narcissist and be done.
Perhaps thats too brusk for the gentleman. I say he is neither an expert in metaphor nor an expert in optometry.
Posted by: padraighh | Wednesday, September 20, 2006 at 11:01 AM
I recall lots of people predicting the death of JP II while he was Pope. Finally he did die as we all have to at some time but not before the prophets of his early demise departed their earthly life.
The critics who deprecate Benedict XV's intellectual, diplomatic, and theological skills will also find sooner or later that they have been out thought and out played in theology, politics, and diplomacy already.
Habemus Papam!
Posted by: John | Wednesday, September 20, 2006 at 01:15 PM
"Who does he think he is, the pope?!"
LOL
Posted by: John Sheridan | Wednesday, September 20, 2006 at 01:27 PM
Carl,
Has anyone told you lately what a great blogger you are?
Thanks for the great work.
Posted by: miasarx | Wednesday, September 20, 2006 at 01:51 PM
Has anyone told you lately what a great blogger you are?
No, but my wife told me this morning she wishes I would shower and change out of my PJs before 3:00 pm. I took it as a compliment.
Thanks for the great work.
My pleasure. Thank you!
Posted by: Carl Olson | Wednesday, September 20, 2006 at 02:06 PM
Carl--
Hi there! Great post. This furor over Regensburg is insane, isn't it? I've enjoyed good reading about it from Fr. Fessio & Schall on this site, John Allen's piece at NYTimes, the NY Sun editorial, and some good excerpts that Amy Welborn posted at her page. Craziness, craziness. 'If you dare to say Islam is violent, we will kill you!'
Your wife told you that? ha ha ha!
I hope that the kids are treating the two of you very well. Take care, and keep up the great work.
A Eugene ex-pat in PDX [but not missing the hippies]...
Posted by: Ben Swag | Wednesday, September 20, 2006 at 11:51 PM
Hey, Ben, great to hear from you! Come visit Eugene sometime and we'll round up some anarchists, hippies, and Marxists to welcome you back. :-)
Posted by: Carl Olson | Thursday, September 21, 2006 at 08:44 AM
I think the Rev. Thomas Reese's problem is that he's a Jesuit priest who hasn't yet realized he's a Catholic.
What gall, what hubris, for Reese to make such a comment! Must be the lingering sting of being forced out of his editorship.
From the article:
"I think his problem is that he's a German academic who hasn't realized yet he's a pope," said the Rev. Thomas J. Reese of the Woodstock Theological Center at Georgetown University."
Posted by: Frank | Friday, September 29, 2006 at 09:33 PM
Yo Man !
Handbags
Posted by: Stive Angelo | Saturday, July 28, 2007 at 04:53 PM
If you don't want to see this links, please email me dnsk_mail [ A t ] yahoo.com
And give URL of your site. Snxs.
Posted by: Stive Angelo | Friday, August 24, 2007 at 04:07 AM
If you don't want to see this links, please email me dnsk_mail [ A t ] yahoo.com
And give URL of your site. Snxs.
Posted by: Stive Angelo | Friday, August 24, 2007 at 08:19 AM