Ratzinger Named Pope Benedict XVI
Well the conclave went quite quickly. I didn’t expect it to go so quick, nor did I think that Cardinal Ratzinger would get the election, but that’s what happened. I’m not yet sure what I think about him. He seems to be the most obvious heir to Pope John Paul II, which is great. But of all the things about Pope John Paul’s legacy that Ratzinger most exemplifies is his more conservative aspects. Not that I necessarily disagree with all of John Paul’s conservative doctrine issues, but Ratzinger seems almost militant about enforcing doctrinal uniformity which is a bit unnerving.
In his sermon Monday in St. Peter’s, Ratzinger defended a conservative approach to faith.
“To have a clear faith according to the church’s creed is today often labeled fundamentalism,” he said, “while relativism, letting ourselves be carried away by any wind of doctrine, appears as the only appropriate attitude for the today’s times. A dictatorship of relativism is established that recognizes nothing definite and leaves only one’s own ego and one’s own desires as the final measure.”
The church has been shaken by “numerous ideological currents,” Ratzinger said. “The boat has been unanchored by these waves, thrown from one extreme to the other: from Marxism to liberalism, up to libertinism; from collectivism to radical individualism; from atheism to a vague religious mysticism; from agnosticism to syncretism, and on and on.
“An adult faith does not follow the waves of fashion and the latest novelty,” he concluded.
To a degree I agree, but I guess it depends on how he handles it. It could be bad, but we’ll see.
I would have loved to see a Latin American Pope. Not only would it be cool to get it out of Europe, but the developing world is the fastest growing place for Catholicism, and should be represented. Plus I think their priorities would be different. I think spreading the faith and fighting poverty, hunger, disease and the rest should be the Church’s priorities. Ensuring doctrinal uniformity and respect for centralized power in the Pope shouldn’t be the main concern I think.
April 19th, 2005 at 3:36 pm
I agree with you… I was rooting for the archbishop of Tegucigalpa, in Honduras, or someone Latin American, but it didn’t seem…. and the other option was Cardinal Sodano (Secretary of State of Vatican City)… while I liked the idea of a Spaniard, even Ratzinger is better than a hard line Franquist, and personal friend of Augusto Pinochet (who interceded to avoid his extradition to Spain).
April 19th, 2005 at 6:29 pm
Best way to fight poverty, hunger, and disease is to oppose tyranny and spread economic freedom. I don’t think the charitable approach is the effective way to do that. John Paul II’s strong opposition to Communism and such was good though. Ratzinger serves neither the charitable nor the economic freedom approach to the concerns of today’s Catholic world. The conclave saw the pressing question of our time as one of ideology. I think Francis Arinze would have been a much better alternative.
Benedict may not last all that long however, considering how frail he looks.
April 20th, 2005 at 4:01 am
This new pope is anti-semitic. He was once a nazi supporter. Wouldn’t be surprised if he issued a few blood libels.
April 20th, 2005 at 4:26 pm
Oh gimmie a break Oren. He was a Hitler Youth for a little bit in Germany when he was 12 or something because it was mandatory. My grandfather was forced into the Nazi army when they conquered Hungary, does that make him an anti-semitic Nazi too?
April 22nd, 2005 at 6:48 am
I think that Benedict is a better choice than some of the other men, but like you, I think that someone from the developing world might be better. Also, I’d rather see a pope that was more progressive on the issues, and was willing to take the Catholic faith to the 21st century.
John Paul II, may he rest in peace.
April 22nd, 2005 at 6:50 am
also, thanks for editing your link to me. =)