What happens when an American journalist with a typically dualistic "conservative vs. liberal", politics-are-everything perspective tries to understand Pope Benedict XVI? He becomes a bit befuddled, as does Gerry Gary Stern, in a piece posted by USA Today titled, "Benedict still a mystery after 3 years as pope":
Those wanting to label Benedict can pick and choose from his actions.
If you want to see him as conservative, there's his Regensburg speech, his loosening of restrictions on the Latin Mass, a Vatican document restating the Catholic position that Protestant churches are not full churches, his approval of a policy that men with gay "tendencies" should not be priests, and his statement in Brazil last year that missionaries did not impose their beliefs on native cultures.
If you want to see him as surprisingly moderate, you can look to his many statements about protecting the environment, his meeting with dissident theologian and longtime nemesis Hans Kung, his desire to meet with Muslim leaders, and his overall desire to be a teaching pastor to all Catholics who want to listen.
Allen has coined the term "affirmative orthodoxy" to describe Benedict's papal approach. So far, the pope has chosen to explain and explore classic Catholicism in a positive light, rather than issuing warnings or sounding alarms.
Goodness, that is mysterious: the Pope is trying to explain the Catholic Faith to both Catholics and non-Catholics. Golly, if he ain't careful, he might end up believing in some of that Catholic stuff. In fairness, Stern's piece does have a few good quotes:
"He's not the charismatic rock star pope that John Paul II was," said David Gibson, author of The Rule of Benedict. "Part of it is age — he was 78 when elected. But he also wants to lower the profile of the person of the pope. He doesn't want the pope to be the object of people's faith or veneration. He wants that to be Jesus. John Paul tried to draw people to the faith through his own faith, his own personality. Benedict wants to get out of the way, to present the faith and step aside." <snip>
"John Paul had the mastery of facial expressions, the just-right gesture, soundbites," said John Allen, a leading Catholic analyst and author of a pre-papal biography of Ratzinger. "Benedict doesn't speak in soundbites but in tersely crafted paragraphs. To understand what he's trying to say, you actually have to listen from start to finish, which is very much a challenge to our soundbite culture. That's why there is a tremendous gap between what the Catholic insider knows about him and what the average person knows." <snip>
"In his first three years as pope, he has tried to bring the people of the church back to the basics of the faith, back to the Eucharist, back to prayer as the center of Christian life," said George Weigel, a Catholic theologian and senior fellow of the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington.
There seems to be the notion, on the part of some folks, that a somewhat shy academic cannot also be a vigorous defender of the Faith as well as a personable and eloquent pastor of souls. Why are these so incompatible? Likewise, why is loosening the restrictions on the Latin Mass considered to a "conservative" act when it is actually a liberating/liberal act (in the best sense of those oft-abused words)? And isn't the desire to be a proper steward of creation who properly conserves natural resources and acts responsibly re: the material world a conservative action? Not, of course, if you use the typical American Political Lexicon for such things. And therein, I think, lies much of the problem: trying to force what is Catholic and oriented toward the permanent things into the cramped, narrow confines of sectarian ideology. For example:
But how will this shy, scholarly, even-keeled pope play in Washington and New York, where memories of John Paul II are still fresh?
Sigh. If you insist on thinking in those terms, Pope Benedict XVI will continue to be a "mystery" to you.




































































































Great point about the nonsensical nature of seeing the Holy Father's liberalizing the use of the old Mass as conservative, while seeing the desire for conservation of the environment as liberal, I have a feeling the closer we come to April the more annoying and frequent will be these type of depictions of Benedict.
Posted by: Matt | Monday, March 24, 2008 at 07:12 AM
"how will this shy, scholarly, even-keeled pope play in Washington and New York, where memories of John Paul II are still fresh?"
Another example of a journalist creating a story where there is none... Memories of JPII are "fresh" in New YorK? Hardly.
Posted by: joe | Monday, March 24, 2008 at 11:22 AM
"Benedict doesn't speak in soundbites but in tersely crafted paragraphs. To understand what he's trying to say, you actually have to listen from start to finish, which is very much a challenge to our soundbite culture."
Amen!
Posted by: Brian Day | Monday, March 24, 2008 at 01:24 PM
"And therein, I think, lies much of the problem: trying to force what is Catholic and oriented toward the permanent things into the cramped, narrow confines of sectarian ideology."
Indeedy. Let's try to get all the various sects to think in the Catholic way, thereby making a common lexicon possible. ;-D
I do kind of like the sound of "affirmative orthodoxy" though. If such a thing exists, it certainly shows through in the person of B16.
Posted by: Telemachus | Monday, March 24, 2008 at 02:21 PM
"Secular Journalists! Reverse! Reverse!"
Posted by: Fr. Jack Hackett | Saturday, March 29, 2008 at 03:22 AM
"Secular Journalists! Reverse! Reverse!"
Posted by: Fr. Jack Hackett | Saturday, March 29, 2008 at 03:22 AM