More on Benedict XVI

The National Catholic Reporter, an independent publication that has pretty good journalistic standards (from my POV) has a couple of informative articles up shedding light on the philosophy and formative events of former Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. The first, Hero of church's conservative wing becomes Pope Benedict XVI is somewhat optimistic, acknowledging concerns about his past while identifying signs that Benedict XVI might not be as imperious and autocratic as his time heading up the Inquisition lead some Catholics to fear:

Yet those who know Ratzinger have always been struck by the contrast between his bruising, polarizing public image and his kind, genteel, generous private side. In person, Ratzinger comes across as refined and almost shy, and bishops who have had dealings with him over the years almost uniformly testify that he is a good listener, genuinely interested in working collegially. Those with trepidations about a Ratzinger papacy will be watching carefully in the days and weeks to come for indications that this kinder, gentler Ratzinger will be the figure who emerges as Pope Benedict XVI.

The very name is maybe one indication. While the primary reference may be to St. Benedict, the founder of European monasticism, no doubt there are echoes also of Benedict XV, who reigned from 1914 to 1922 and put an end to the conservative anti-modernist campaigns of the pontificate of St. Pius X. Benedict said that rather than worrying about the least signals of doctrinal error, it was enough for someone to use Catholic as their first name, and Christian as their family name.

Perhaps, therefore, Pope Benedict XVI was sending a subtle signal that he too would like to be a conciliator rather than an authoritarian, repressive figure.

The second article, The Vatican's enforcer: A profile of Cardinal Joseph Ratizinger is a reprint from 1999. It's long and very thorough in addressing criticisms aimed at Ratzinger, and offering up counterpoints to each claim. Even so, it's clear that the author of the piece isn't a great fan of the cardinal, and it reenforces the general perceptions I've had of the man since the late 90s when I first became aware of him and the powerful influence he wielded at the Vatican as head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (which is the Office of the Inquisition, boasting a kinder, gentler name).

It was thus Joseph Ratzinger who is said to have penned Frings' famous line about the Holy Office, asserting that its "methods and behavior do not conform to the modern era and are a source of scandal to the world."

Krätzl, who believes the progressive energy generated by Vatican II has been stifled under John Paul, sums up his observations of Ratzinger at the council this way: "No one would have suspected that Joseph Ratzinger, who inserted himself so energetically for a renewed vision of the church and thus struggled against the one-sided exercise of power by the curia, would later become himself a high-ranking curial cardinal and prefect of the CDF."

Krätzl is hardly alone in that perception. The apparent shift in Ratzinger from leading progressive in 1962 to architect of the restoration today, has fueled accusations of inconsistency at best and hypocritical careerism at worst.

Coupled with the fact that the Cardinal Ratzinger has publicly endorsed a smaller church, excluding those who aren't "Catholic enough" (ie those who don't agree with him to the letter), my hopes for the papacy of Benedict XVI are pretty low, to say the least. But the enormity of the office is enough to change anyone, I suppose, and his choice of papal name seems to be some gesture of reconciliation within the church. I'm giving him a chance--not that he cares what I may think of him--but when one's expectations are so low, any sign of moderation or collegiality will be a welcome surprise.

Now Playing: SixMileBridge No Reason