Catholic Apologetics International
The Election of Pope Benedict XVI
by Robert Sungenis
I think it is safe to say that many faithful Catholics breathed a sigh of relief when it was announced that Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was elected as the 265th pope, Benedict XVI. We can tell by the negative reactions of the liberals that they are not too happy with Ratzinger’s ascendancy to the papal throne. Unfortunately for them, since the 1960s Ratzinger had become a prominent fixture in the Roman curia, and now it has reached full flower.
I think we can anticipate that Pope Benedict XVI will be a no-nonsense leader for the Church. Although in his long career he has sometimes elicited concerns about his own detractions from tradition, considering the mixed lot from which he was picked, I think faithful Catholics can agree that the results of the papal conclave could have been disastrous. There were many ultra liberal Cardinals hoping that one of their persuasion would be picked instead of Ratzinger. Fortunately that did not happen.
Like Pius IX who came into the papacy with a few liberal strains but left a champion of orthodox Catholicism, so I believe the same thing will occur with Pope Benedict XVI. It may be no coincidence that Pope Benedict XVI begins his reign in 2005, precisely 40 years after the closing of Vatican II (1965), the same length of time Israel was wandering in the desert for 40 years due to the sins of its fathers. In the wake of Vatican II and its liberal interpreters, the Catholic Church has been wandering in the theological desert for the last 40 years. With earnest hope, we await our earthly Joshua to bring us to the land of Canaan. Viva il papa!
In contrast to John Paul II, I believe that Benedict XVI will produce much less verbiage and engage in much more action. Although Benedict XVI will certainly try to be conciliatory to those in opposition to the Church, he will tolerate neither liberal theology nor modernist social mores – the two insidious diseases that has so weakened the post-conciliar Church for the last 40 years. Cardinal Ratzinger demonstrated he was up to the task when he orchestrated the demotion of Hans Küng, who is now consigned to a small pastorate in Switzerland and is no longer considered a Catholic theologian.
In addition, Pope Benedict XVI will not be as accommodating to the various religions of the world. We won’t see anything close to the Assisi Interreligious Prayer Gatherings, the events which so marred the pontificate of John Paul II. I also don’t think we have to worry about Pope Benedict XVI capitulating to Protestant theology, since he made his opposition very clear when he refused to attend the signing of the Lutheran-Catholic Joint Declaration on Justification initiated by the out-of-control ecumenism of John Paul II.
I believe that Benedict XVI will restore discipline to the Church, a discipline that was virtually absent from the pontificate of John Paul II. Among many other things, he will crack down on homosexuals in the clergy; he will reiterate the Church’s barring of women priests; he will not tolerate dissent from established Catholic dogma, whether it comes from cleric or layperson. He, much more than John Paul II, will not cower to the threat of schism from those who refuse to buckle under the Vatican’s authority. The Catholic Church in America should prepare themselves for a direct confrontation with this pope. They have lived far too long under the lenient hand of John Paul II.
In short, I believe that Pope Benedict XVI will address and hopefully rectify much of what went wrong in the pontificate of John Paul II. The world loved John Paul II because, basically, he accepted everyone, no matter what faith or persuasion. Pope Benedict XVI will, I believe, be more apt to draw a line in the sand and bring the Church back, at least somewhat, to her previous distinction from the world.
Conversely, some say that Pope Benedict XVI was chosen so quickly because he is seen as someone who will continue the policies of John Paul II. Perhaps in some ways this prediction can be justified, but I can think of many more Cardinals who would fill that prescription better than Joseph Ratzinger. I believe that, although Pope Benedict will continue the moral stand of John Paul II against abortion, euthanasia, divorce, contraception, sexual immorality and other social ills, he will also depart from John Paul II’s pontificate in major areas.
Out of 116 cardinals voting for the pope, only three of them were not elected by John Paul II. Cardinal Ratzinger was one of those three. He is his own man and I do not believe he will be so heavily influenced by John Paul II in the theological areas. Theologically speaking, in many ways John Paul II was a maverick. Cardinal Ratzinger was often at odds with John Paul II, even though they agreed on general matters regarding the Church. Many of the major doctrinal pronouncements of John Paul’s pontificate were written by Cardinal Ratzinger (e.g., Dominus Jesus; Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, etc). It was Ratzinger, not John Paul II, who affirmed that Ordinatio Sacerdotalis was “infallible” (the document stating that women were barred from the priesthood).
In short, I believe Pope Benedict will bring back, at least to a noticeable degree, the doctrinal integrity of the Church. There will be no more implicit teachings of universal salvation; the Protestants will not be told they can be saved by faith alone; the pagans of the world will not be told they have direct access to God in their own religions; no apologies will be given for hard-line Catholic doctrines of the past. As for liturgy, if the requiem Mass for John Paul II is any indication of the sentiments of Pope Benedict XVI, I believe the Latin Mass will be resurrected to a status unseen since Vatican II and the abuses of the Novus Ordo will be minimized.
But these things, of course, will make a lot of enemies for Pope Benedict XVI, and he will not be as popular a pope as John Paul II. I don’t suspect he will be traveling far and wide; rather, he will be sending his envoys with the papal message that the Vatican is going to run a tighter ship now that the German shepherd is on the throne.
Alas, even though Pope Benedict XVI has much more potential of vastly improving the papacy and restoring its honor, there are some potential problem areas I see. Cardinal Ratzinger, for example, was the main engineer behind the attempt to silence the Fatima cult; and the one who produced the incredible interpretation that John Paul II was the “bishop in white,” the principal figure in the Fatima vision. Just 10-15 years prior (1984), the then Cardinal Ratzinger was saying that Fatima was saturated with apocalyptic events yet to be fulfilled. This dichotomy in his thinking is certainly unsettling. It is my hope that Pope Benedict XVI will retrieve his former evaluations of Fatima and seek to properly administer the consecration of Russia, even as Our Lady promised that some future pope would most definitely do. Let’s hope Pope Benedict XVI is that pope. It may be no coincidence that his namesake, Benedict the XV, was the very pope reigning when the 1917 Fatima visions occurred.
In another instance, Cardinal Ratzinger, along with Cardinal Kasper, approved the adiaphora of Mari for a middle eastern Church, which is equivalent to approving a Catholic Mass without the traditional words of consecration. Let’s hope that this collaboration with Kasper was a moment of indiscretion, a slip of the pen, as it were, in the face of the enormous ecumenical pressure brought on by John Paul II. With the sincerity and faithfulness Cardinal Ratzinger displayed during the requiem mass for John Paul II, it appears as if he is ready and willing to restore the traditions of the Church to a very large degree. That the requiem mass was chanted in Latin and with the traditional vestments of the priesthood was no accident. That Cardinal Ratzinger gave a stirring homily concerning his desire to keep the Church close to its traditional beliefs was no accident either. It was the very thing that stirred the other Cardinals to see that he held the greatest potential to reign as the next pope. Fittingly, when Pope Benedict XVI was announced to the crowds, it was followed by a solemn Latin benediction and absolution.
During Vatican II it was Fr. Ratzinger who initiated the change in the language “The Church of Christ is [Latin: est] the Catholic Church” to “The Church of Christ subsists [Latin: subsistit] in the Catholic Church.” Although many argue that, in the true Latin definition of “subsistit” there is little practical difference between it and “est,” still, there was no reason to change the language, since it inadvertently created an ambiguous meaning that would be exploited by the progressivists coming out of Vatican II. Let’s hope that Pope Benedict will continue to teach that the Roman Catholic Church is the one true Church of Jesus Christ and that the change of wording was not meant to cause confusion.
In 1966 Fr. Ratzinger authored a book in German titled “Die sakramentale Begruendung Christlicher Existenz” (“The Sacrament is the Foundation for Christian Existence”) which downplayed the act of Eucharistic devotion based on the contention that God’s presence could not be localized. A popular translation of his words reads: “This is repugnant to the man of serious thinking who is aware of the omnipresence of God. To go to church on the ground that one can visit God, who is present, this is a senseless act which the modern man rightfully rejects.” Let’s hope that this view was merely a product of youthful theological indiscretion. Since he has never reiterated such a downplaying of Eucharistic devotion, it no longer seems to be a part of his thinking.
What is a little more unsettling, however, are the comments Cardinal Ratzinger made in 2004 concerning the Jews, that is, what is claimed as their independent wait for the Messiah. After the research of the Pontifical Biblical Commission headed by Cardinal Ratzinger, it was concluded in their findings that: “The Jewish Messianic expectation [for the Messiah] is not vain. It can become a strong stimulus for us to maintain the eschatological dimension alive...Like them, we also live in expectation... The difference is in the fact that for us the One who will come will have traces of that Jesus who has already come and who is present and active among us.” The tradition of the Church, however, has never taught that Jewish people, outside of the Catholic Church, can, on a theological basis, anticipate the return of the Messiah in the context of their own Judaistic religion. As noted in the patristics, the medievals, papal and conciliar statements, the return of the Messiah in blessing is directed solely to the Christian Church. All others will see the Messiah coming in judgment. It is my hope that the new pope is not swept along by an erroneous Jewish-based eschatology prevalent among many of the more liberal-minded prelates today. For those interested, please see my essay, “Judaizers in the Catholic Church”
In any case, as of 1970 when Pope Paul VI demoted the authoritative status of the Pontifical Biblical Commission, its pronouncements are now considered merely the opinions of the twenty biblical scholars that fill its ranks. Accordingly, Cardinal Ratzinger himself stated about the Commission: “The Pontifical Biblical Commission, in its new form after the Second Vatican Council, is not an organ of the teaching office, but rather a commission of scholars who, in their scientific and ecclesial responsibility as believing exegetes, take positions on important problems of scriptural interpretation and know that for this task they enjoy the confidence of the teaching office.”
Lastly, the choosing of the name “Benedict” tells us something significant about our new pope. The last Benedict was Benedict XV who reigned from 1914 to 1922. It is as if Cardinal Ratzinger wanted to catapult us back to the past, at a time when the Catholic Church was in the midst of two pathways: traditionalism or modernism. Cardinal Ratzinger had implied many times that the Church had somehow taken a detour and needed to be pulled back to its former heritage. Following Pius X’s reform, Benedict XV, at least in the early part of his reign, likewise moved against liberalism and modernism. I believe Cardinal Ratzinger chose the name Benedict XVI since he will also seek to root out liberal theology from the Church. Unfortunately, as even Cardinal Ratzinger recognized in a 1962 statement, the Church has leaned so far to the left since the time of Benedict XV that what may appear to us as “conservative” or “traditional” today would be considered “liberal” or “modern” in the time of Benedict XV. In that light, Pope Benedict XVI has a tough job ahead of him.
In choosing the name “Benedict,” I also can’t help but reflect on the prophecy of St. Malachy, the 12th century prelate of Ireland who predicted, by means of symbolic names, the remaining popes of the Catholic Church. Although no one is held to his private revelation, it is rather intriguing that Cardinal Ratzinger picked the very name that corresponds with St. Malachy’s prophesy. Malachy’s 111th prophesy states that after the pope symbolized as “De Labore Solis” (which many believe is John Paul II), there would be the “Gloria Olivae.” The Benedictines are known as the Olivetans. Is Pope Benedict XVI following this prophesy? Perhaps. No one knows for sure. Even more intriguing is that, according to Malachy’s prophecy, “Benedict” is either the last pope or next to the last pope.
Regardless, let us all pray mightily for Benedict XVI. Each of us should say at least a decade of the Rosary for him on a daily basis. We plead with God to raise Pope Benedict XVI to heights even he never even dreamed possible.
Robert A. Sungenis
President: Catholic Apologetics International
4-19-2005
Catholic Apologetics International