The first pontiff of the Third Millenium, Pope Benedict XVI was born Joseph Alois Ratzinger in the small Bavarian town of Marktl am Inn on Holy Saturday, 1927. His father was a policeman and his mother was from the Austrian region of Tyrol, and both were devout Catholics. His father retired in 1927 and the family tried their best to avoid the expanding Nazi regime of Adolf Hitler, Ratzinger's father being a known critic of the Nazis -the same party which dismissed Catholicism as a religion of "Jews and Romans". He escaped service throughout most of World War II because of his age, but as the situation grew worse he was forced into the Air Force in 1943 but never served in any combat role. Later he was pressed into the labor corps where he worked in Eastern Europe before being released and drafted into the army, but his unit never went to the front. Before the war ended, young Joseph deserted at the risk of his life because of his opposition to the Nazi regime. He knew he had a religious calling and was determined to spend his life serving the Church.
After attending the seminary, where he did very well having a reputation as a very intelligent, devout and scholarly young man with an "angelic" singing voice, he was ordained a priest in 1951 along with his older brother Georg. He continued his studies and in 1958 became a professor at Freising College. The following year he took a post at the University of Bonn where he served until 1963 when he transferred to the University of Munster. His reputation had become so great that Joseph Cardinal Frings of Koeln, Germany took Fr. Ratzinger with him as his theologian to the Second Vatican Council. Ratzinger was included as one of the reformers of Vatican II, but would later write extensively on the need to "reform the reforms" of the council. Like many at the time, he thought the changes outlined by the Council were necessary but that these were often implemented in such a way as to remove any value or even be harmful to the Church and its work.
In 1966 Ratzinger went to work at the University of Tuebingen, but later resigned because of the increasing acceptance of secularism, atheism and Marxism. He became an outspoken but very thoughtful critic of such rising world-wide trends as materialism, communism, liberalism and the acceptance of homosexuality. In March of 1977 Ratzinger was named Archbishop of Munich and Freising, taking as his motto, "be co-workers in the truth". Three years later he was given the rank of cardinal by HH Pope Paul VI. Shortly after the accession of Pope John Paul II, Cardinal Ratzinger was named Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in 1981. This office, known as the Holy Office of the Inquisition before Pope St Pius X changed it in 1908, made Cardinal Ratzinger the chief enforcer of orthodox doctrine for the Church. The former Holy Office couldn’t have been in better hands.
While doing his duty in this office, Cardinal Ratzinger gained many friends and more than a few enemies because of his firm determination to uphold Catholic doctrine. Some of the issues he tackled which gained him fame and notoriety were his writings explaining that Catholics who voted for pro-abortion politicians were cooperating with a sinful act, that women could not be ordained priests, that homosexuality was wrong and homosexual marriages an absolute sacrilege and firmly upholding the supremacy of the Catholic Church as the one, true church founded by Christ for the salvation of the world. Many non-Catholics were outraged by this as were many Catholics (or “Catholics”) who had been advocating that the Church embrace things like abortion, gay “marriage” and ordain women. While Cardinal Ratzinger was on guard, such agendas were certain to go nowhere. As he grew older, Cardinal Ratzinger tried several times to retire, but Pope John Paul II would not let this most devout and faithful cardinal go. Finally, as Dean of the College of Cardinals, Ratzinger had the sad duty of presiding over the funeral of Pope John Paul II after his death on April 2, 2005.
After the traditional conclave, on the second day of voting, April 19, 2005 Cardinal Ratzinger was elected to the Throne of St Peter, taking the name of Benedict XVI. He announced that the goals of his reign would be to unite all Christians, resist the creeping secularism in the world and uphold the truth and purity of the Church's teaching. Benedict XVI, at 78, is the oldest man elected to the See of Peter since Pope Clement XII in 1730 and is the seventh German pope in history. Many worried that Benedict XVI would be far too authoritarian, but have quickly discovered the warmth, humor and humility of the new Pope. He has spoken out of the need to battle the "dictatorship of relativism" and to unite all Christians without any compromise to the truth because of the pressure of the modern world. This has led to some controversies as the Pope has dealt with other religions though in virtually every case it was a case of hyper-sensitivity or feigned moral outrage rather than any extremism on the part of the Pontiff. Eyebrows were raised when the Pope categorized the Catholic and Orthodox communities as churches but the Protestants as Christian sects. This was, of course, simply a reference to the Apostolic Succession which, generally, Protestants do not consider significant anyway. Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez, among others, also expressed outrage when the Pontiff, while visiting South America, said that the indigenous peoples were ’silently longing’ for Christianity. Many people seemed to ignore the basic truth that any Christian would (or should) believe that everyone is longing for Christianity, consciously or not.
Benedict XVI has made sincere efforts at outreach to people of other religious beliefs but many in the secular world cannot see that or understand how the Pope could do so while refusing to compromise the teachings of the Catholic Church. While not relenting in pursuit of the goal of Christian and religious unity, the Pope has also made it clear that past efforts at times mistakenly gave the impression that all beliefs are the same, an impression he has worked to correct, viewing it as another aspect of the tyranny of relativism which he has devoted his reign to opposing. This has also fit in with the noticeably more traditional style of Pope Benedict XVI. Since his election he has elevated the traditional form of the mass (in the Latin language) within the Church, insisted on a more traditional and reverent pose for those receiving communion and has adopted more traditional style vestments than have been seen in recent times. He has also enacted special guidelines to welcome in disgruntled traditional Christians into the Catholic Church, specifically from the Church of England where the embrace of the ordination of women, gay “marriage” and other issues have caused many old-fashioned Anglicans to turn to Rome.
In the past, moves in this direction were often discouraged by many Catholic officials for fear that anything seen as “traditional” would put off younger Catholics and drive people out of the Church. Pope Benedict XVI doesn’t seem to be buying that line of thought. In fact, the Pope has spoken out on several occasions that he believes the Church must hold ever more strongly to traditional truth even while Catholicism may be reduced to small (but devout) isolated communities in a sea of secularism and irreligion. The choice of his reigning name reflects this as well, calling to mind St Benedict, that a new “Dark Ages” is coming which the Church will have to endure, protecting what they have inherited, before going out to start the work of conversion all over again. The quality and ability of Pope Benedict XVI can be easily gauged by simply asking Catholics their opinion of him. Some will have unqualified praise while others will have nothing but criticism. However, it is those who actually attend Church regularly and believe in Church teachings (even the really difficult ones) who think well of him and those who are more ‘Catholics in name only’ who do not. There should be no doubt that, from a Catholic perspective, for devoted Catholics, Benedict XVI has been a great Pontiff. Those who criticize him are generally those who favor innovation and do not view Church history and tradition with great respect. In other words, generally the sort whose criticism speaks well for the person in question.
As a devout Catholic, it's increasingly hard to refute the argument that post-Vatican II change brought a real crisis for the church. The fact we are seeing unprecedent numbers of schismatic groups, however marginal they may seem still raise legitimate questions and attract many sympathisers. I came to the more traditionalist view after many years of analysing what went wrong.
As for abuses by the clergy, I think that while this is a deplorable problem, it is greatly blown out of proprtion given that: - a minority of clergy in all denominations have been guilty, yet the majority are tainted by it. - the "progressives" never ask about abuse in non-religious bodies, or in pre-Christian societies that are bizarrely idealised by some. Nor the comments of Peter Tatchell, Germaine Greer, etc. - far greater abuses happen in "fringe" religions, but the media is too sensitive to highlighting such cases post-Waco. - a more liberal friend of mine said to me that kids people were far more likely to be abused at home or school than in a church. - what about the exposure of children to pornography and mindless consumerism and sexualised entertainment?
I can go on and on. But recently the son of French politician Philippe De Villiers was charged with sexual abuse, yet you never hear much of it. If it were a priest, we'd be hearing it all the time.
Excellent post on the Reigning Pontiff, and quite true regarding the opinions of him espoused by Catholics, both practising and non. And the range of opinion certainly does His Holiness one credit, it proves the Church is relevant. How? Because he is annoying people and pleasing others.
Ah, would that Papa Benedict really WOULD don the triregnum! I continue to maintain that it was a mistake to lay aside the papal tiara, especially at the time it was done, as it seemed to be a gesture not only of putting off a mere piece of headgear, but also the authority of which the headgear is a symbol.
Yes, in the meantime I have to look at 'doctored' photos and dream. My biggest complaint with setting aside the crown was that, while a great sign of humility, it turns something positive into something negative and means that an ancient tradition will have a hard time being restored because no one wants to look vain.
See, were I Pope, I would not mind looking vain if it could help restore the tradition - I would be more suited for the administrative nature of the Renaissance Papacy than I would for today's, however.
And I hope a Pontiff comes along who is brave enough to do the same. Considering how the modern world is so obsessed with how things "look" makes me realize it will take nothing less than bravery to do so because you KNOW what all the critics will say.
Additionally, if it matters, I'm one of those odd few who thinks the Renaissance Papacy was glorious. Not flawless certainly, but very glorious and their flaws have, I think, been grossly exaggerated.
Certainly the mob is arrogant, but it is also hypocritical and expects those above them to embody qualities they themselves would never display. Especially when it comes to Christian authorities, the slightest perception of weakness is seized upon.
I agree with David Votoupal. The papal regalia honors not the man but his office, and especially Him Who established that office.
Incidentally, somebody actually created a lovely tiara for Benedict XVI, and there is a picture of him receiving it (though, alas, he has never worn it, at least in public). Now, as far as I'm concerned, the tiara of Paul VI that he set aside can stay set aside, as it is ugly.
You can check the archives and see that the gift of Benedict XVI's tiara was covered here when it was given. I certainly would like to see him make use of it. Although it is not to my taste I see no reason to denigrate the crown of Paul VI. It is enough for me that those of John Paul II and even moreso Benedict XVI have been done in a more traditional style.
C'mon...it's ugly. It may have historical significance, and it may have been fitting in view of the fact that Pope Paul VI was a fan of modern art, but it's still...ugly. In fact, in the light of the after-time, it also strikes one as a harbinger of the forthcoming sterilization under the guise of simplification of Catholic churches, and especially of the liturgy.
(sigh) I would just prefer people emphasized what they do like instead of criticizing what they don't, be it crowns or those who wear them. What is done cannot be undone (only corrected going forward) and groaning about it just seems pointless to me. The post was about Benedict XVI, not Paul VI and not his bullet-like crown. We may never see a papal coronation again but if we do, one thing we can be sure of is that it will not feature Paul VI's crown which is no longer in the papal collection.
MM, it is not often that one reads a post on His Holiness with the proper level of respect and charity shown here. Thank you.
I also appreciate that the words "sexual abuse" appear nowhere. Nowadays, any story that includes the words Catholic Church includes those as well, a level of slander that I cannot see applied to any other institution in history.
As someone else pointed out there are far more cases of sexual abuse on average in schools, at home, nurseries, health organizations, including hospitals and political organizations than in a Catholic Church. The Catholic Church has at least addressed the problem. None of these others organizations have raised a finger to correct this.
Where did you get that from? The numbers of child abuse in the Catholic Church correspondend exactly with the numbers for the overall population - or in the Protestsnt Church, for that.
As a devout Catholic, it's increasingly hard to refute the argument that post-Vatican II change brought a real crisis for the church. The fact we are seeing unprecedent numbers of schismatic groups, however marginal they may seem still raise legitimate questions and attract many sympathisers. I came to the more traditionalist view after many years of analysing what went wrong.
ReplyDeleteAs for abuses by the clergy, I think that while this is a deplorable problem, it is greatly blown out of proprtion given that:
- a minority of clergy in all denominations have been guilty, yet the majority are tainted by it.
- the "progressives" never ask about abuse in non-religious bodies, or in pre-Christian societies that are bizarrely idealised by some. Nor the comments of Peter Tatchell, Germaine Greer, etc.
- far greater abuses happen in "fringe" religions, but the media is too sensitive to highlighting such cases post-Waco.
- a more liberal friend of mine said to me that kids people were far more likely to be abused at home or school than in a church.
- what about the exposure of children to pornography and mindless consumerism and sexualised entertainment?
I can go on and on. But recently the son of French politician Philippe De Villiers was charged with sexual abuse, yet you never hear much of it. If it were a priest, we'd be hearing it all the time.
Excellent post on the Reigning Pontiff, and quite true regarding the opinions of him espoused by Catholics, both practising and non. And the range of opinion certainly does His Holiness one credit, it proves the Church is relevant. How? Because he is annoying people and pleasing others.
ReplyDeleteAh, would that Papa Benedict really WOULD don the triregnum! I continue to maintain that it was a mistake to lay aside the papal tiara, especially at the time it was done, as it seemed to be a gesture not only of putting off a mere piece of headgear, but also the authority of which the headgear is a symbol.
ReplyDeleteYes, in the meantime I have to look at 'doctored' photos and dream. My biggest complaint with setting aside the crown was that, while a great sign of humility, it turns something positive into something negative and means that an ancient tradition will have a hard time being restored because no one wants to look vain.
DeleteSee, were I Pope, I would not mind looking vain if it could help restore the tradition - I would be more suited for the administrative nature of the Renaissance Papacy than I would for today's, however.
DeleteAnd I hope a Pontiff comes along who is brave enough to do the same. Considering how the modern world is so obsessed with how things "look" makes me realize it will take nothing less than bravery to do so because you KNOW what all the critics will say.
DeleteAdditionally, if it matters, I'm one of those odd few who thinks the Renaissance Papacy was glorious. Not flawless certainly, but very glorious and their flaws have, I think, been grossly exaggerated.
To me, the disrespect and discarding of tradition does not make one a humble ordinary person, it makes one arrogant.
ReplyDeleteI have no doubt but would you consider yourself typical of the mainstream public around the world?
DeleteWho is to say that the Genral Public is Humble? Oftentiems arrogance exisstin crowds.
DeleteCertainly the mob is arrogant, but it is also hypocritical and expects those above them to embody qualities they themselves would never display. Especially when it comes to Christian authorities, the slightest perception of weakness is seized upon.
DeleteI agree with David Votoupal. The papal regalia honors not the man but his office, and especially Him Who established that office.
ReplyDeleteIncidentally, somebody actually created a lovely tiara for Benedict XVI, and there is a picture of him receiving it (though, alas, he has never worn it, at least in public). Now, as far as I'm concerned, the tiara of Paul VI that he set aside can stay set aside, as it is ugly.
You can check the archives and see that the gift of Benedict XVI's tiara was covered here when it was given. I certainly would like to see him make use of it. Although it is not to my taste I see no reason to denigrate the crown of Paul VI. It is enough for me that those of John Paul II and even moreso Benedict XVI have been done in a more traditional style.
DeleteC'mon...it's ugly. It may have historical significance, and it may have been fitting in view of the fact that Pope Paul VI was a fan of modern art, but it's still...ugly. In fact, in the light of the after-time, it also strikes one as a harbinger of the forthcoming sterilization under the guise of simplification of Catholic churches, and especially of the liturgy.
ReplyDelete(sigh) I would just prefer people emphasized what they do like instead of criticizing what they don't, be it crowns or those who wear them. What is done cannot be undone (only corrected going forward) and groaning about it just seems pointless to me. The post was about Benedict XVI, not Paul VI and not his bullet-like crown. We may never see a papal coronation again but if we do, one thing we can be sure of is that it will not feature Paul VI's crown which is no longer in the papal collection.
DeleteI'm not active in posting comments on here, but I've been following what you write. Thanks for taking the time to write about our Pope!
ReplyDeleteThanks for reading, and the occasional comment.
DeleteMM, it is not often that one reads a post on His Holiness with the proper level of respect and charity shown here. Thank you.
ReplyDeleteI also appreciate that the words "sexual abuse" appear nowhere. Nowadays, any story that includes the words Catholic Church includes those as well, a level of slander that I cannot see applied to any other institution in history.
As someone else pointed out there are far more cases of sexual abuse on average in schools, at home, nurseries, health organizations, including hospitals and political organizations than in a Catholic Church. The Catholic Church has at least addressed the problem. None of these others organizations have raised a finger to correct this.
ReplyDeleteWhere did you get that from? The numbers of child abuse in the Catholic Church correspondend exactly with the numbers for the overall population - or in the Protestsnt Church, for that.
DeleteOh My God, how I miss him! Thanks for that excellent article.
Delete