Was the pope’s statement on Turkey and the EU misreported?
Howard Sutherland writes:
I stand by what I wrote about Benedict the Sixteenth in the e-mail you generously posted in VFR. But I would like very much to be wrong about what B16 was up to, and if it turns out I am, I hope you will permit me a VFR mea culpa. This Catholic League news release gives me some hope that I may be wrong. I am wary, though, because the Catholic League, and especially Bill Donohue, often strikes me as a cheerleader for the pontifical incumbent, no matter what he does, and defensive to boot.
Still, B16 gave the impression, and the press reported with fanfare, that he supports Turkey in the EU, and neither the Pope nor any of the Church’s many functionaries are doing anything noticeable to change that impression. It isn’t enough any more just to reiterate what Cardinal Ratzinger said in 2004, that Turkey doesn’t belong in the EU because it is not European, Christian or Western – although I would love to hear the Pope or an authoritative spokesman say that. The Church – ideally in the person of the Pope – has to criticize the EU as the anti-Western, anti-Christian, anti-European (in the true sense), nation-destroying monstrosity it is. I think B16 could make that a rallying cry of fed-up European people against their soulless self-destructive governments, which make the EU and its works possible. The Pope would not be criticizing any European nation, and in diplomatic terms I don’t think he would be directly challenging any national government.
I live in hope, but quotes like this from the Pope and Patriarch’s common declaration make me think they still don’t get it: “We have viewed positively the process that has led to the formation of the European Union.” They need to stop ‘viewing it positively’ and start looking at it.
Here in its entirety is the Bill Donahue press release linked by Mr. Sutherland:
November 30, 2006
MEDIA BLOW IT BIG TIME:
POPE DID NOT CHANGE STAND ON TURKEY AND EU
Catholic League president Bill Donohue commented as follows:
“It is one of most embarrassing journalistic blunders to have occurred in some time. All the news reports which said that Pope Benedict XVI now supports the admission of Turkey into the European Union were wrong. He never said any such thing. Here is what happened.
“Yesterday, the headline of a front-page article in the New York Times read, ‘In Reversal, Pope Backs Turkey’s Bid to Join European Union.’ It quoted Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan’s comment that the pope told him that ‘we wish for Turkey’s entry into the E.U.’ The problem is that the pope’s version of what he allegedly said was nowhere reported, and that’s because he never commented on the brief conversation that was held at the airport. But now he has spoken. Here is a quote made today by the pope and Patriarch Bartholomew in their ‘Common Declaration’:
We have viewed positively the process that has led to the formation of the European Union. Those engaged in this great project should not fail to take into consideration all aspects affecting the inalienable rights of the human person, especially religious freedom….In every step towards unification, minorities must be respected, with their cultural traditions and the distinguishing features of their religion.
“In other words, Pope Benedict XVI has not flip-flopped: admission of Turkey into the European Union is conditioned on its willingness to respect the religious rights of minorities (something it has failed to do).
“The most accurate journalistic source was Bloomberg News. The most accurately worded editorial appears in today’s Philadelphia Inquirer. The most flagrantly inaccurate editorial is in today’s Newsday: ‘Tuesday, he [the pope] admitted he was wrong and reversed his stance, offering full support to Turkey in its long-stalled efforts to join the EU.’
“There is more than carelessness involved here. Some hate the Catholic Church so much they can’t wait to try to prove the pope wrong. Looks like the Holy Father got the last laugh.”
LA replies:
Donahue’s statement is unpersuasive. If there was a misconception about the pope’s statement, it was not the media’s fault, but the Vatican’s fault since they did not clear up the impression created by the Turkish prime minister’s comment about what the pope had said. Erdogan said plainly that Benedict supported Turkish admission. The pope did not gainsay this. The Vatican did not gainsay this. Are we to believe that the Vatican was not aware of the media’s coverage of the trip and lacked the facilities to correct any errors?
In addition, the Common Declaration of Benedict and Bartholemew is written in code; only Vatican insiders would know what it really means. Donahue says it means that the pope would not accept Turkish admission. But that is not clearly stated. So, once again, the Vatican and the pope let stand the impression that the pope had reversed himself on Turkey.
As several of us commented in the long thread on the pope, when it is a matter of civilizational survival, you don’t play games with ambiguous messages. Too many people are relying on your statements. So, even if it turns out to be true that the pope did not say he approves of Turkish entry, the way he has handled this makes me distrust him. I don’t see him as a leader of the West. I see him as a weak and facilitating politician. I put no trust in him.
Finally, re Mr. Sutherland’s comment on the pope and the EU: Yes. The Papacy stood against the anti-God, anti-human evil of Soviet Communism. Why can’t it stand against the anti-God, anti-human evil of the EU? But I don’t expect it to. As far as the secular or civilizational side of his leadership is concerned as distinct from the religious side, Benedict is like any other politician today. He’s not a leader.
Posted by Lawrence Auster at December 07, 2006 06:58 PM | Send