Posted on 04/19/2005 3:17:20 PM PDT by Pokey78
For the past 25 years, a meeting took place each week which defied the history of the 20th century. A Pole and a German met in peace to discuss the will of God. Every Friday, Pope John Paul II, the Pole, sat with Josef Ratzinger, the head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, alone. Now the Pole is dead, and the German is Pope.
In some ways, it is even more extraordinary to have a German Pope than it was to have a Polish one. Much of Polish society retained its Catholic integrity under Communist persecution. Most of German society succumbed to Hitler, compromising itself.
To choose a man brought up at that time and in that place is to state that the most corrupted human society can be redeemed. If the world accepts the new Pope, Germany's atonement will be recognised and its honour among the nations will be restored.
In Pope Benedict XVI, as Ratzinger has now become, the German experience inspired a particular respect for the Jews. At school, though not at home, he was taught by Nazis that Christ had been an Aryan but in his religious instruction it was insisted that Jesus was indeed a Jew. Jews and Christians, Ratzinger believes, say "a common 'yes' to the living God".
He does not believe that you cannot speak of God after Auschwitz. "I would say," he has declared, "that the Cross recapitulates in advance the horror of Auschwitz."
Why has this learned man, the theologian who debated with John Paul, the philosopher, chosen the name Benedict? In part, maybe, out of respect for the last pope of that name, who was mocked by both sides for trying to bring peace in the First World War.
But I would suggest a historically more distant inspiration as well: St Benedict, the man who had given birth to monasticism in the twilight of the Roman Empire. His "rule" - his instructions to monks - laid the foundations, Ratzinger believes, for the methods of democracy. His spiritual spark kept the light of Christianity alive through centuries of darkness.
"Think of late antiquity," Ratzinger once told an interviewer. "Where St Benedict probably wasn't noted at all. He was also a dropout who came from noble Roman society and did something bizarre, something that later turned out to be the 'ark on which the West survived'. "
This, I suspect, is Ratzinger's model. He strongly supports the documents of the Second Vatican Council, but his experience of the subsequent turmoil in the Church has taught him that Western culture is profoundly hostile to the message of Christianity.
He is fascinated by Herman Hesse's novel Steppenwolf, with its portrait of the self-isolating man. Because today egotism is exalted rather than the love of God, "this destruction of the capacity to live gives birth to deadly boredom. It is the poisoning of man. If it carried the day, man, and with him also the world, would be destroyed".
That destruction will be avoided, Benedict XVI believes, not by the Church trying to recover worldly power, but by renewing, as Benedict did, its intellectual and moral reverence for the truth.
In his cast of mind the new Pope is rather more sombre than his predecessor. He is more disturbed by false argument, less optimistic about the immediate prospects for mankind. He believes, as he told the conclave this week, that the "dictatorship of relativism" is tyrannising the modern world.
And so his favoured images are of survival, preservation of treasure, and of the regrowth of the Church from a tiny grain of mustard seed. He admires Englishmen such as Thomas More and Cardinal Newman - "a man who listens to his conscience and for whom the truth that he has recognised... is above approval and acceptance, is really an ideal and a model for me".
The answer to the question of our time, the new Pope believes, may be to challenge the spirit of that time: "The Church can be contemporary by being anti-contemporary." He is stern, yes; obscurantist, no.
On the only occasion that I met Cardinal Ratzinger, I was struck by three things. The first was his embarrassing courtesy. I handed him an article I had written about becoming a Catholic, assuming he would put it "on file". Instead he read the whole thing right through as I sat before him.
The second was his intellectual curiosity: he was not a man living in the past, but rather one tackling with a civilised and clear mind the new challenges of human thought. The third, surprising characteristic, was his openness: friendly, relaxed, almost chatty, always trying to answer any question put.
The cardinal struck me as a man happy in himself, though sorrowful about the state of the world. He was hopeful, however. He takes inspiration from the chance that he was born on Easter Eve: "I find that a very good day, which... hints at my conception of history and my own situation; on the threshold of Easter but not yet through the door."
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
Good post! A welcome counter to the many nasty digs at the "right wing" pope. I also think he surely had St. Benedict in mind. After all, Benedict XVI rightly regards the present time as a new Dark Age in the West, into which the light of Christian truth must dare to shine.
GREAT article.
Excellent article.
Re: "St Benedict, the man who had given birth to monasticism in the twilight of the Roman Empire."
A prophetic turn of phrase perhaps? It sure seems like the twilight of Western Civilization.
Good find. Thanks!
Excellent article. There is a lot of meat here.
Look straight at the media, and poke it in the eye.
Prophetic or not, it gives St. Benedict too much credit: monasticism was birthed in the deserts of Egypt and Palestine by men like St. Anthony the Great, St. Poemen the Great (one of my favorites--he once avoided having his contemplation disturbed by pre-emptively meeting visitors on the road, and when they asked directions to his cell, responding, "What do you want to see him for? He's a fool and a heretic!"), and, of course St. Pachomius, who originated the Rule which St. Benedict took to the West.
(And it give the Empire too little credit---the loss of the Western provinces only counts as the 'twilight of the Roman Empire' among those like Gibbon who want to ignore the fact that the Empire became Christian, had its capital moved to New Rome (a.k.a. Constantinople) and continued for almost a millenium after the retirement of the last Western Augustus, albeit dwindled to a city-state in its last centuries--or maybe it isn't quite gone even now, thanks to the monks: though there hasn't been an Emperor in ever so long, Mount Athos is still run under the same charter and internal governing structure it had when there was an Emperor, and still flies the imperial flag (!) ---perhaps what began as a pagan republic, still lives as a Christian republic inhabitted entirely by Orthodox monks .)
Great points! Do they really fly the old Byzantine (old Roman) flag on Athos? What does it look like?
Super article!
Excellent, inspired choice...
The right man for the times.
Yes. Black double-headed eagle on a gold field.
Our mother parish has one, too. Our old priest's son, as an Eagle Scout project, erected two flag poles on the parish property, one for Old Glory, and one for the even older.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.