Whenever a new pope is elected the old familiar question, ‘What’s in a name?’ is bound to arise. So we might ask what Cardinal Ratzinger’s choice of the name Benedict might imply? Such a question doesn’t, of course, have a simple answer. John XXIII surprised everyone with his choice, since John XXII was an ex-pirate who had cheated and perjured his way to the papacy. At first he said the name was dear to him because it was his father’s name and the name of the church where he had been baptised. It was the name that had been most used by popes, nearly all of whom had had a brief pontificate. It was a deliberate retrieval and rescue of the name from the gospels of the two men who had been closest to Jesus, more especially the author of the exhortation to love one another. So clearly there can be a lot in a name. Paul VI said that he chose his name because he wanted to reach out to modern gentiles. John Paul I was seeking to combine the progressive and traditional qualities of his two predecessors. John Paul II was both honouring his predecessor’s brief reign and seeking perhaps to follow his intention in his choice of name.
So what might be said of the choice of Benedict? St Benedict is the patron saint of Europe. He was the founder of the monastic order that preserved the best of Roman learning and culture through the so-called ‘dark ages’. He composed a rule that has inspired religious and lay people alike with its profound simplicity, its combination of work and prayer and its humane account of the necessary qualities of leadership (including the importance of consultation even with the most junior members of the community. )
The last Pope to take the name Benedict was elected on September 3, 1914, coinciding with the outbreak of the First World War. His election was in some ways a surprise. Pius X whom he succeeded, had insisted on the church’s rights in the political sphere, and had worked tirelessly against modernisers in theology, harassing church scholars and widening the breach between the Church and the intelligentsia. (The career of the Catholic lay theologian, Baron von Hugel who lived here in Hampstead at 4 Holford Road is of great interest in this context).
Benedict XV was a diplomat and peacemaker, suspected of unsoundness by Pius X and lacking the charisma of his predecessor. Most of his pontificate was taken up with the attempt to maintain the Vatican’s neutrality in war, even refusing to pass judgement on the wide scale atrocities lest he be thought to be taking sides. He protested against inhuman methods of warfare and sought wherever he could to alleviate suffering, spending in the region of 82 million lire on humanitarian relief programmes. He proposed a peace plan in 1917 based on justice rather than military victory, which everyone ignored. He regarded the eventual settlement to be inspired by vengeance rather than justice and likely to lead to further conflict. After the war he pleaded for reconciliation and gave general support to the formation of the League of Nations. He increased the number of countries diplomatically represented at the Holy See (including for the first time since the 17th century, Great Britain). He put an end to the animosity between die-hard traditionalists and the modernists, speaking out in his inaugural encyclical against indiscriminate denunciation by traditionalists. He supported the formation of Christian Trade Unions. He opened up the possibility of ecumenical dialogue with the Orthodox churches. He became known as the ‘Pope of Missions’ because of his concern that missionaries should be seen not as serving the imperialist interests of their country of origin, but as working for the welfare of the people amongst whom they lived and the formation of an indigenous priesthood. He is the only Pope, I think, to have a statue erected in his honour in Istanbul, as ‘the benefactor of all people, irrespective of nationality or religion.’ John XXIII had had audiences with all his predecessors in the twentieth century and found Benedict to be the most sympathetic.
How much of all this is relevant to Benedict XVI? His election has been greeted with some anxiety by contemporary modernisers and certainly his record as prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith shows him to be a man who is not afraid to speak out in ways that he must know will evoke powerful criticism. Rock music, Buddhism, American ‘protestantisation’ of its Latin neighbour, pro-abortion Catholic Democrats, the candidacy of Turkey in the EU, the description of the Anglican Communion as a ‘sister’ church, feminism, liberation theology, and gay marriage have all come into his line of fire. He is frequently referred to as a fine theologian, though his writings do not create new perspectives but rather present a ‘thinking along with’ theologians of different periods, to open up a conversation with the modern world. His work has been described ‘as a life long attempt to produce a specifically Christian evaluation of cultural trends.’ He is said to be fierce and divisive but also mild, gracious, un-careerist, and modest, a cultured man who lives very simply and loves to play Mozart and Beethoven on the piano. Since his election he has stressed the need for outreach, collegiality, the promotion of understanding with other churches, and religions. Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor has suggested that the world may now see a very different side to Joseph Ratzinger’s character.
Whatever the case there seems to be two issues that will principally concern the new Pope in his early days. The first seems outside the provenance of an Anglican to comment on as it concerns the internal workings of the Curia. However, as we try to establish new modes of working together in the Anglican Communion, it will be interesting to see how Pope Benedict responds to the frequently heard suggestion that his predecessor’s world wide ministry left an administrative vacuum in Rome. Vatican II’s call for greater consultation and collegiality went largely unheard as the Curia centralised power in Rome, preventing the Synod of world wide Bishops from becoming a forum for serious discussion and debate. It will be interesting to see if and how a Pope who must know the workings of the Vatican inside out, sets about reforming the Curia, making the many new senior appointments that are overdue, and gently encouraging discussion and decentralisation.
The other issue that clearly concerns the Pope was spelt out in his address before the conclave when he warned that, ‘We are moving towards a dictatorship of relativism that recognises nothing definite and leaves only one’s ego and one’s desires as the final measure.’ It may be that in England we are less aware of this aggressively anti-religious secularism which the Pope perceives in continental Europe, though the way in which the media treats the Church of England should perhaps give us more pause for thought. The challenge is to discover a way of responding to ‘the dictatorship of relativism’ which enables the eternal truth of the gospel to be heard and understood at a deep level, rather than exacerbating the conflict between church and world so as to leave Christianity inside an ever shrinking and increasingly defensive ghetto. I have only one book by Joseph Ratzinger a short account of ‘Why I am still in the church.’ In it he writes:
“There seems to be no middle way between the iconoclasts and a reaction that clings too much to externals and what has always been, between contempt of tradition and a mechanical dependence on the letter. Public opinion places everyone inexorably in his precise category, for it needs to have clear-cut rules, and admits of no nuances; a person has to be either a progressive or a conservative. But reality, however, is different.’ And so we wait to discover the nuances in Pope Benedict XVI, praying for him and for all our brothers and sisters in the Catholic Church.
With my love and prayers,
Father Stephen
The Vicar Writes
Stephen Tucker