The pope’s Easter day downer, cont.

Yesterday I read in the New York Sun (no link) the full text of Pope Benedict XVI’s tour d’horizon of this fallen world that he delivered on Easter in St. Peter’s Square. It was much worse than I had thought from the partial quotes of it in the media that I commented on the other day. Further, the Christian framework he gave to his remarks seemed like little more than a pretext. He started by talking about the “wounds of Christ” and how seeing the sufferings of this world in that light can take us beyond suffering. But then he embarked on this unrelieved, seemingly endless catalog of the world’s miseries that amounted to a descent into worldly despair. An incredible downer! On what was supposed to be the most joyous day of the Christian year.

I hope I am not offending Catholic readers, but it seems to me that the Catholic Church is too much into suffering, not enough into salvation; too much into Christ’s wounds (which, after all, he only endured in the flesh for a few hours), not enough into his eternal life and joy.

By the way, the Sun in the same issue launched, in no less than two articles and an editorial, a major attack on the pope’s remarks, not because of the things I’ve mentioned, but because as part of the pope’s litany of global catastrophe he mentioned Iraq, where he said there were no positive developments. That is the Sun’s idea of true heresy.

Howard Sutherland, who is a Catholic, writes:

You are right about B16. There are days to deliver messages like that, I suppose. On the feast of our Lord’s Resurrection, why didn’t he focus on the joy of that? Isn’t that why we are Christians in the first place?

LA replies:

Here’s one guess. From the moment the pope folded and surrendered to Islam following his stirring Regensburg address, he lost his nerve—and his hope. He sees no hope for the West, which he used to believe in, and so he sees the world through eyes of hopelessness.

And let me add a point I’ve made before, that the pope’s surrender to Islam—and, in my theory, his resulting despair about the world—were made inevitable by Vatican II’s liberal ecumenical doctrine concerning Islam to which he wholeheartedly subscribes. Liberalism brings not only the death of our civilization, but the loss of Christian joy.

- end of initial entry -

Mark N. writes:

I think you underestimate His Holiness, who in my opinion is a wily old fox. He hasn’t thrown in the towel in our civilizational struggle with Islam, by a long shot.

The pope thinks in large global terms, and in time spanning decades. He is totally aware of the danger that Islam poses to the West, but he also understands the spiritually anemic condition of the people he so wants to protect. He knows full well the West is presently not up to the daunting task of defeating the Islamists and secularists threatening the small remnant of Christendom still existing in Europe. How will he get the West back in good enough shape to establish a credible line of defense? Well, I can name one.

His Holiness is working overtime to heal the Catholic rift with Eastern Orthodoxy. He wants both the Latin Rite and Eastern Churches to join in a common defense against the Islamic enemy, by being one Church. Both the Orthodox and Catholic Churches are apostolic, that is true churches with valid holy orders, liturgical prayer, and sacramental theologies. The Catholic Church considers the Orthodox to be in a state of schism, but in no way heretical. On the other hand, Protestants are considered heretical, and not true churches. Rather they are thought of as “ecclesial communions.” The pope at this point may give lip service to the ecumenical spirit, but he has put the Protestants on the “back burner” for now. He has bigger fish to fry.

I agree with you that Benedict’s remarks this past Easter were not overly. But if you really want to know what the man is thinking, read his theological works, as well as his voluminous output in other intellectual areas.

By the way, the Catholic Church is very concerned about salvation, but that is a discussion for a later date.

LA replies:

If Mark is familiar with VFR he will know in advance what I think of his theory. Every time a Western leader acts in a weak or cowardly or treasonous manner, out come a crowd of rationalizers who say that this poltroonish behavior is really part of a brilliant, deeply devised plan invisible to all but those in the know. When President Bush surrenders some important conservative principle to the left, it’s really part of a Machiavellian ploy to gain an advantage over the left. When Pope Benedict strongly criticizes Islam and then under harsh attack does a 180 and acts like a full-blown dhimmi, the whole event was really part of a deeply thought-out plan to strengthen Christianity and weaken Islam. But, as Freud said, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, and sometimes bumbling is just bumbling, and sometimes appeasement is just appeasement.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at April 11, 2007 03:26 PM | Send