Civility is next to charity

Darcy believes that we must seriously consider the possibility that the present Pope, Benedict XVI, is unfit to be let out in polite society.

With an estimated 2 billion adherents, Christianity is the most widespread faith on earth. Of that number, roughly half are Roman Catholics, who look to the Bishop of Rome for guidance on matters spiritual, moral and sometimes even temporal. The Roman Catholic Church makes the usual claims for true understanding of God and stresses the primacy of the Pope. Unlike many other religions, this is also supported by weight of numbers; whereas protestants are split into numerous factions, the orthodox are more collegiate, the Sunni have numerous leaders, Vaishnavist Hindus are fundamentally quite separate from the Shaivist, and even Mahayana and Theravada Buddhism have their differences. Though the more lunatic fringes of protestantism consider the Pope to be very very wicked, most now treat him with respect. This is also true, to a lesser extent, of the orthodox. And while Muslims may consider Christianity adulterated, the leader of the largest grouping within the Christian world is again generally accorded respect. The Pope also enjoys a few curious prerogatives. He rules over a city-state, the only religious figure to enjoy the ability to issue his own stamps and coins. When speaking ex cathedra, he is held to be infallible. (In this, at least, he has company: Shiites routinely make the same claim for their religious figures). Since late Roman times, he has been called Vicar of Christ; and the keys on his coat of arms are the so-called "keys to heaven".

All this makes the Bishop of Rome the most important single religious figure in the world. Some recent popes have been inspirational. Darcy has a soft spot for John XXIII who cut a great mass of barnacles away from the body of the Church. Others have been less so. The jury (on this earth) is still out on Benedict XVI. A theologian of note, much praised for his laser-sharp intellect, the present Pope was semi-affectionately nicknamed the Panzerpapst in deference to his nation and in expectation of a Margaret Thatcher-like assault on the enemies of the Roman Church.

However, Darcy notes with surprise that outside of a few Catholic priests, the Pope's powder seems to have had strange side effects. Worse than this, some of his remarks will enter papal lore as among the least well considered. In one respect, Darcy understands the Pope. He cannot be expected to exude more than a basic goodwill towards other Christian sects, let alone other faiths. Since the late Middle Ages, the Roman Church has believed that only full communion with Rome would lead a person to heaven. Therefore for the Pope to promote anything other than Roman Catholicism would not only be silly, it would be doctrinally empty (unless he were speaking ex cathedra) and he would be in danger of seeming to acquiesce in committing untold numbers to limbo or hell.

The Pope's address at Regensburg, while lauded as a theological tour de force, was condemned with even greater fervour elsewhere. Not only is the latter highly reasonable (Benedict XVI launches a nearly 34-paragraph discussion of the supposed union between the Bible and Greek thought and as early as the fourth digresses wildly to comment on Islam) but Darcy finds little to approve in the logic of his argument. Darcy would very much like the Church to move beyond the philosophy of Augustine and Aquinas. These men were titans, true, but to ignore everyone who followed is silly. The philosophy of the Church is the tool with which it is supposed to convince thinking men and women. Essentially, these tools are now antique. Unfortunately, the Regensburg address will be remembered less for such gems as:

"The encounter between the Biblical message and Greek thought did not happen by chance. The vision of Saint Paul, who saw the roads to Asia barred and in a dream saw a Macedonian man plead with him: Come over to Macedonia and help us! (cf. Acts 16:6-10)-- this vision can be interpreted as a distillation of the intrinsic necessity of a rapprochement between Biblical faith and Greek inquiry."

which Darcy believes sits well with within a sermon but not a supposed philosophical tract, than for the

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached."

which enraged Muslims. Of course, the Pope was not saying that the new faith was evil and inhuman. What need for him to do so, when Manuel II - on whom the Pope lingers at greater length in his speech than on such people as St John the Evangelist, Plato and Socrates - speaks so cogently!

The response to the Pope's comments on Islam is best left to Islamic theologians, who did so in an open letter. The text of that can be found at http://www.islamicamagazine.com/issue18/openletter18_lowres.pdf. But Darcy's meanderings today have further to go. Some time after the Regensburg address, Benedict XVI visited Turkey. His very slight trimming of the sails had taken some of the sting from the insult felt by the Islamic world, and his utterly pleasant and diplomatic demeanour in Turkey means that, for Turks at least, that issue appears now to have been laid to rest.

However, the Pope's very next (and very recent) visit to Brazil has ignited fresh protests. Unlike the Regensburg address (which can be found in the original and amended versions on-line), Darcy has been been able to locate the Pope's speeches only on the Vatican's site. In a speech to Latin American bishops, Benedict XVI stated:

"Yet what did the acceptance of the Christian faith mean for the nations of Latin America and the Caribbean? For them, it meant knowing and welcoming Christ, the unknown God whom their ancestors were seeking, without realizing it, in their rich religious traditions. Christ is the Saviour for whom they were silently longing. It also meant that they received, in the waters of Baptism, the divine life that made them children of God by adoption; moreover, they received the Holy Spirit who came to make their cultures fruitful, purifying them and developing the numerous seeds that the incarnate Word had planted in them, thereby guiding them along the paths of the Gospel. In effect, the proclamation of Jesus and of his Gospel did not at any point involve an alienation of the pre-Columbian cultures, nor was it the imposition of a foreign culture."

Darcy views such comments as insensitive wish-fulfillment at best, and utterly meaningless drivel at worst. Not surprisingly, the reaction was swift. Darcy does not often agree with Hugo Chavez, but he thinks that

"representatives of the Catholic Church of those times, with honorable exceptions, were accomplices, deceivers and beneficiaries of one of the most horrific genocides of all humanity."

is succinct and to the point. Thankfully it was also generally dignified. And the Pope moved quickly, again trimming his sails.

However, the fact remains this Pope has not only angered Muslims (who are not his natural constituency), but has now angered the most vibrant Roman Catholic community in the world. Roman Catholicism today is not an European or North American religion. It is driven by Latin America. So the Pope's insensitivity is remarkable.

Benedict XVI remains a major figure. Darcy would not care to argue with him on matters of doctrine. But for such an intelligent man to make such mistakes is unusual. Darcy does not believe that the present Pope is a bad man. Nor does he believe that he is floating trial balloons to see what he can get away with. But Darcy does believe the Pope to be quite rude. It would perhaps not be remiss to suggest more thought and less of a Socratic monologue the next time.