BENEDICT XVI: NEWS, PAPAL TEXTS, PHOTOS AND COMMENTARY

This being the Sunday preceding the Pope's visit to the UK, the news agencies have started filing their pre-visit overviews. As in his previous trips - and for his Pontificate, in general - the MSM challenge to Benedict XVI is overt, blunt, rather crude (and stubbornly reiterated despite the fact they have often had to eat crow during and after the visits they were most down on): "Here's how it was with John Paul II. You can't possibly measure up!"


Different Pope,
different times



VATICAN CITY, Sept. 12 (AP) — The Falklands war was in full swing and John Paul II was in London as the first Pope ever to set foot on English soil.

Even as he snubbed Margaret Thatcher and prayed for peace in implicit criticism of Britain — whose troops were battling Catholic Argentines — the Pontiff received a rapturous welcome and was described in glowing terms by the Archbishop of Canterbury.

[As this article explains much later, the Pope hardly 'snubbed' Thatcher. It was a diplomatic decision in view of the Falklands war. And in the next decade, she and Ronald Reagan would join John Paul II himself in the triumvirate of world leaders now widely credited for leading the push that led to the collapse of Communism.]

His successor, Benedict XVI, can expect a far cooler — if not at times downright hostile — reception in his upcoming state visit.

It all underscores the contrasting public fortunes of the two leaders of the Church. John Paul was an international superstar who could send a thrill even through non-Catholics and made many people forget how at odds he was with their personal views. Benedict seems to step into crisis and controversy at every turn when he ventures abroad on bridge-building missions.

In 1982, Robert Runcie, then Archbishop of Canterbury, said John Paul came to Britain "with the grace of a pilgrim and a prophet." Runcie’s successor, Rowan Williams, told the BBC in April that Benedict would be welcomed "as a valued partner, and that’s about it." {These comments say more about the persons making the comment than they do about the persons being commented upon.]

Benedict’s visit has been fraught with controversy ever since it was announced by Buckingham Palace in May.

There have been complaints over the costs to British taxpayers for the Sept. 16-19 trip, anger and revulsion over the church’s clerical sex abuse crisis, and a feeling of betrayal among Anglicans upset over the Vatican’s efforts to woo conservative members of their Church.

Although the Polish-born John Paul held virtually the same views on Church doctrine as Benedict, he was at the height of his popularity at the time, celebrated for standing up to Communism during the Cold War. [The usual historical revisionism here. I'm not pointing this out to quibble but for the sake of accuracy: In 1982, John Paul II was only less than 5 years into his Pontificate and was yet to reach the 'height of his popularity'. He had visited Poland only once (1979) at that point, which led to the formation of the Solidarity movement, but few outside Poland in 1982 considered Solidarity and Lech Walesa even newsworthy, and the fall of the Berlin Wall was seven years away. John Paul's stature as a force against Communism was not to be recognized until many years after his visit to the UK!]

His charisma helped him make strong connections with people who did not share his faith or conservative social views. Problems of pedophile priests were already brewing but kept from public knowledge, only coming out when the abuse scandal exploded in the United States toward the end of his papacy. [And why does the AP not add its usual prefabricated slug found in every story it runs about Benedict XVI denouncing the Church for its 'cover-up', indeed avoiding that term when referring to John Paul II, and using the euphemism 'kept from public knowledge'?]

Top British politicians say they welcome Benedict’s visit, but seem compelled[????] to state their differences with him. [When have politicians anywhere ever been reluctant to express their disagreement with the Pope's - i.e., the Catholic Church's - traditional positions against abortion, contraception, and all the other liberal causes that are against its teaching? The same positions which John Paul II held, by the way! The despicable implication is that perhaps they did not mind being associated in any way whatsoever with a 'charismatic' Pope but would not touch this Pope with a ten-foot pole because his 'unpopularity' might reflect on them!]

During a televised debate in April before general elections, David Cameron, now prime minister, said he wanted the visit to be a success but "do I agree with everything the Pope says? No."

"I don’t agree with him about contraception. I don’t agree with him about homosexuality and I think the Catholic church has got some very, very serious work to do to unearth and come to terms with some of the appalling things that have happened and they need to do that but I do think we should respect people of faith," Cameron said.

Benedict will meet with the Queen at a castle in Scotland shortly after arriving and with Cameron in London on Saturday. [Shouldn't the UK pols take the example of the Queen who did, after all, approve of her Government's invitation to the Pope and is sending her husband, in an unprecedented step, to personally welcome the Pope when he arrives at Edinburgh airport?]

John Paul’s visit was two years in the planning, but only confirmed days before departure because of complaints from Argentina, which was at war with Britain after invading the Falkland islands, which it claims are its own and refers to as Las Malvinas.

The Pope agreed to visit Argentina shortly after returning from England, where he prayed for peace during every public event. [As if the Pope only prayed for peace because of the Falklands war. Every Pope prays for peace!]

"We cannot forget that an armed conflict is taking place — brothers in Christ fighting in a war that imperils peace in the world," he said during one Mass.

John Paul also dropped plans to meet with Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher; the official reason was to stress that it was a pastoral and not a state visit.

But he did meet with Queen Elizabeth, whose ancestor, Henry VIII, established the Church of England after breaking with Rome in 1534 over the Vatican’s refusal to annul his first marriage to Catherine of Aragon.

John Paul said he felt "deeply moved" to be the first Pope on English soil in what was described as a pilgrimage of reconciliation to a country that officially discriminated against Catholics until the 1820s.

Catholics, less than 10 percent of the population, still face a problem marrying into the royal family. They can marry in, but the royal loses his or her place in the succession.

There were scattered demonstrations during John Paul’s visit, mainly by small groups calling the Pope "Anti-Christ" and by followers of the Rev. Ian Paisley, the militant Northern Ireland Protestant leader.

In contrast, for this papal visit, a group called Protest the Pope has lined up gay, feminist and secular groups to stage protests against the visit — and there has even been talk of serving the Pope with an arrest warrant because of the abuse scandal. [What does it say of AP's objectivity that it fails to mention teh ff: 1) Protest the Pope had to cancel a planned demo in Scotland for lack of participation; 2) London police do not think they can muster more than 2000 at most for their planned London rally?]; and 3) that the arrest-the-Pope ringleaders have conceded they cannot do it, legally nor physically????]

Although Benedict has not been accused of any crime, some British lawyers have questioned whether the Pope should have immunity as a head of state and whether he could be prosecuted under the principle of universal jurisdiction for an alleged systematic cover-up of sexual abuses by priests.

The German-born Benedict has never sought to be a crowd pleaser like his predecessor, having assumed the papacy after two decades in the back rooms of power [A sinister suggestion of 'smoke-filled rooms' generally associated with politicians plotting shady deals. By all accounts, Cardinal Ratzinger was always a loner in the Roman Curia and was part of no faction at all] as the Vatican’s ideological chief. At 83, he is 20 years older than John Paul when he made his British pilgrimage and drew an estimated 2 million people to his events.

[The point AP - and almost all of MSM - consistently ignore is that, although 'Benedict has never sought to be a crowd pleaser', even as young Prof. Ratzinger, he has always been a crowd pleaser just by being himself - shy but dubbed 'Goldmund' from the start because of what he said and how he said it. And would anyone less than a crowd pleaser consistently draw audiences to his routine events in numbers that surpassed John Paul II's from the beginning? But of course, they consistently ignore any facts in Joseph Ratzinger's biography that does not fit the ironcast cliche to which they have reduced him to.]

Benedict, who speaks good English among other European languages, seems more comfortable among small groups.

Monsignor Mark Langham, the British-born Vatican official in charge of relations with Anglicans, recalled the excitement of John Paul’s visit as he spoke to The Associated Press at the English College seminary in Rome’s historic center. Forty-four of its former students were martyred in England in past centuries.

"The Falklands war was going on, the forthcoming marriage of Prince Charles and Lady Diana had just been announced, the Pope was coming. We felt we were living through history. The enthusiasm, the excitement was something you could feel."

He acknowledged that the atmosphere over Benedict’s trip is not the same.

"We’re in a different era now, and Pope Benedict is not Pope John Paul II. I think for various reasons there have been problems and issues. What I have noticed is that in the last few weeks and days, excitement is ratcheting up and I think people are beginning to take up and take notice about what’s going to happen."

And what will happen on this visit?

"I think it will be one perhaps where people came to see John Paul, they’ll come to hear Pope Benedict," Langham said.

[Mons. Langham should avoid thinking in cliches, such as his last statement which never made any sense since it was first coined. Especially because it is more of an insult to John Paul II, as if no one was ever interested in what he had to say. And a self-contradiction for those who think no one is interested in Benedict XVI at all! Also, in terms of excitement, a second papal visit is never of the same order as a first one in a country where Catholics are a minority. Unlike in Catholic countries, where every papal visit is a singular event, sui generis.

BTW, despite its full share of biases, this AP story is suspiciously 'tame' compared to its Munich-Oakland offensive last spring. Are they perhaps saving up some new 'scandal' they intend to spring just as the Pope steps on British soil? ]


Here's AFP's pre-visit overview. UN disarmament agencies should take lessons from Benedict XVI on how he has managed to sidestep all the 'minefields' that MSM have predicted for him on almost every trip he makes abroad!

Pope faces minefield in
historic visit to Britain


VATICAN CITY, Sept. 12 (AFP) - Pope Benedict XVI embarks Thursday on a historic but delicate visit to Britain as the paedophile priest scandals and tensions with the Anglican Communion threaten to undermine his mission.

The first state visit of a Pope to Britain -- his predecessor John Paul II made a "pastoral visit" in 1982 -- will begin in Scotland, where Benedict will meet Queen Elizabeth II, titular head of the world's Anglicans, at the Palace of Holyroodhouse in Edinburgh.

The 83-year-old head of the Roman Catholic Church will proceed to Glasgow, London and Birmingham on the four-day trip.

He will meet British Prime Minister David Cameron and attend Mass gatherings that will feature singing sensation Susan Boyle and The Priests, a trio of Catholic priests. [Typical secular insensitivity, to identify these 'mass gatherings' - they are Masses, dummies, spiritual events - with the presence of pop stars. As if the events would have no significance otherwise.]

But paedophilia will be a dominant theme, notably because the Pope is expected to meet with victims for a fourth time in his five-year-old papacy.

"At least on that day, there will be a lot of talk about that," Vatican expert Andrea Tornielli of the conservative Italian daily Il Giornale told AFP.

The Vatican would however not confirm the mooted encounter with 10 British victims in London. [There was an item yesterday in which Jack Valero of Catholic Voices committed the questionable indiscretion of speaking of such a meeting as a done deal, even saying ten victims were expected to be present.]

Pope Benedict met with victims during trips to Australia and the United States in 2008 as well as in Malta in April this year.

The Vatican was plunged into deep crisis in 2009 after two successive reports in Ireland revealed widespread abuse mainly of boys by priests going back decades, coupled with alleged high-level cover-ups by the Church hierarchy. [That's a more objective statement than one usually sees in MSM. But there's still the loose use of the adjective 'widespread' without indicating the fairly small number of complaints amassed in over six decades.]

Protests are set to unite those who accuse Benedict of not doing enough to crack down on predator priests with activists who oppose his views on a range of issues such as abortion, contraception, women's ordination and gay couples' right to adopt children.

The main protest is set to take place in London, where an estimated 2,000 people will march from Hyde Park to the prime minister's Downing Street office.

The relatively small number suggests general indifference to the second visit by a Pope since England's King Henry VIII broke with the Church of Rome in 1534, according to the Vatican, which asserted that Britain has more anti-Pope sentiment than anywhere else. [Why should the small number of protesters suggest 'general indifference' rather than, more obviously, the fringe nature and overall insignificance of the protesters despite the disproportionate attention paid to them by media and the even more disproportionate amplification of their messages to strengthen the MSM's 'case' against Benedict and the Church?]

Britain's 5.2 million Catholics make up less than 10 percent of the population.

A recent opinion poll found that four in five Britons say they are indifferent to the Pope's visit, while 77 percent objected to the cost estimated at more than 20 million euros (25 million dollars) in public money. [77% objection is not indifference! That's hostility! Don't the pollsters and the media see that at all? However, the 77% apparently do not object enough to go out and march against the Pope. That's not indifference either. It's laziness or their objection is not strong enough to warrant marching in protest!]

The British government is paying up to 14.5 million euros for the state elements of the visit, while Catholic churches in Britain have contributing up to 10 million pounds (12 million euros) for the religious aspects, of which six million has already been raised.

"Pilgrim contributions" of between six and 30 euros will be solicited at the Pope's public appearances, another object of harsh criticism.

The Pope will also be walking on eggshells in handling relations with the Anglican Communion since the official highlight of the trip will be the beatification of 19th-century cardinal and writer John Henry Newman, an Anglican who converted to Catholicism. [Unless I have been misreading all the reports and commentary, Newman's beatification has never been raised as a bone of contention with the Anglicans, who are happy Newman will be beatified as they have long included him in their calendar of venerated Christians. Did the reporter forget about Anglicanorum coetibus which he/she fails to mention at all? And no, the pope won't be walking on eggshells because whatever it is Pthat Rowan Williams wished to thresh out with him about Anglicanorum coetibus was already addressed, at least initially, when they met at the Vatican earlier this year!]

Some 65,000 people are expected to attend the beatification mass set to take place on September 19 in Birmingham.

Pope Benedict last year announced measures making it easier for disaffected Anglicans to join the Catholic fold. [Almost 20 years, it must be pointed out, since the Traditional Anglican Communion first started writing the Vatican to work out such a mechanism. A convenient omission which gives the impression that the Pope actively pursued these disaffected Anglicans!]

"Part of the Anglican world considers it like a sort of incorporation on the part of the Catholic Church," said Marco Politi, the Vatican expert for Italian daily Il Fatto Quotidiano.

The Pope has appeared undaunted by the diplomatic challenge, saying on Wednesday that he was "very much looking forward" to the trip.

Tornielli predicted that Benedict would "not fail to speak out against what he believes are dangerous trends, such as the adoption of children by gay parents."

Part of the great intellectual excitement Benedict XVI can generate in those with an open mind is that he always manages to surprise - whether in major discourses like Regensburg and Bernardins, or in his 'routine' homilies and messages, not to mention in his encyclicals and books. Even if the general topic can be known, no one can predict exactly what new approach he will take, what he will say and how he will say it. Speaking as a highly biased Benaddict, I am always enchanted by the freshness he brings to his texts.

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 12/09/2010 21:46]