E-Mail This Article to a Friend A frightening choice If John Paul was a conservative, Benedict is a narrow-minded reactionary

POPE BENEDICT XVI — the name taken by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger — is 78 years old. That may be the only good news about his election this past Tuesday as the successor to John Paul II. Then again, it would be foolish to assume that Benedict’s advanced age is any guarantee that his papacy will be inconsequential. After all, Pope John XXIII was 76 when he ascended to the throne of St. Peter in 1958, and he did more to move the Catholic Church in a progressive, open direction than any pontiff had in hundreds of years. Benedict appears to be healthy and vigorous, so he should have more than enough time and energy to drag the Church back into the 19th century, at least.

For years now, on issue after issue, the new pope has staked out the most reactionary ground imaginable, coming across not just as more conservative than John Paul, but as harsher, more judgmental, less — one might say — Christ-like. As prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Ratzinger had been John Paul’s closest aide, denouncing homosexuality, the ordination of women, even, of all things, the admission of Turkey into the European Union, on the grounds that Europe should remain Christian.

Ratzinger’s numerous nicknames say it all; "Cardinal No," "God’s Rottweiler," and "the Grand Inquisitor" are just a few. His dark and disturbing vision was on display in a sermon he delivered last month. "How much filth there is in the church, and even among those who, in the priesthood, ought to belong entirely to Him [Christ]," Ratzinger preached, according to an account in the National Catholic Reporter. "Lord, your church often seems like a boat about to sink, a boat taking in water on every side." And if you think that perhaps Ratzinger was blasting pedophile priests, you’re sadly mistaken.

On Tuesday, the Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests released a statement criticizing Ratzinger for apparently derailing a probe several years ago into the Reverend Marcial Maciel, the founder of the Legion of Christ, who has been accused of sexually abusing at least nine boys. The investigation was reopened several months ago, but the new pope has never demonstrated any sympathy or understanding for the victims of rapist-priests. Indeed, on one occasion when he was asked about the crisis, he responded like an American politician: he blamed the media. "I am personally convinced that the constant presence in the press of the sins of Catholic priests, especially in the US, is a planned campaign," the future pope reportedly said. As inadequate as John Paul’s response to the pedophile-priest issue may have been, he never came close to expressing that level of contempt and dismissiveness.

Nearly 45 years ago, John F. Kennedy overcame two centuries of discrimination against Catholics in the United States by assuring a group of Protestant ministers that, if elected president, he would not take his orders from the Vatican. "I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute," Kennedy said. As a cardinal, Ratzinger turned that formulation on its head. In a particularly ugly screed against same-sex marriage issued in 2003, he wrote that Catholic office-holders have "a moral duty" to vote against "the recognition of homosexual unions." (He has also labeled homosexuality an "intrinsic moral evil" and "a serious depravity.") Moreover, Ratzinger has suggested that Catholic politicians who favor abortion rights may be denied communion — something that caused Senator John Kerry no end of grief in his presidential campaign last year. As pope, Benedict may push that to its logical conclusion, forcing progressive politicians to choose between their religion and their commitment to a pluralistic society in which not everyone is a Catholic.

Not every criticism of Benedict is fair. Among the things we are learning about the pope this week is that he joined the Hitler Youth at the age of 14 (as all German boys were required to do), but was allowed to leave to pursue his religious studies. He also served briefly in the German military, apparently without ever firing a weapon. Such facts are hardly cause to condemn Benedict. The truth is that his father, a policeman, was so disgusted with the Nazis that he moved his family four times in order to avoid having to serve them. Nevertheless, it’s hard not to notice that while young Joseph Ratzinger was keeping a low profile in Nazi Germany, young Karol Wojtyla was risking his life in the Polish resistance.

In a post on his weblog, Andrew Sullivan — Catholic, gay, and conservative — wrote of Benedict’s selection: "It would be hard to over-state the radicalism of this decision. It’s not simply a continuation of John Paul II. It’s a full-scale attack on the reformist wing of the church. The swiftness of the decision and the polarizing nature of this selection foretell a coming civil war within Catholicism. The space for dissidence, previously tiny, is now extinct."

For progressive Catholics, and for non-Catholics concerned about what this means for everyone else, this has been a sad and frightening week. Perhaps American Catholics will begin leaving in droves, a development that has been predicted for some time, and that Benedict himself has indicated he would not mind seeing: he has long yearned for a smaller, purer flock. It is likely that the 26-year papacy of John Paul II will come to be seen as an interregnum, a time when Catholics were able to overlook the Church’s deepening conservatism and unite around John Paul’s ecumenism and force of personality. After him, the deluge?

What do you think? Send an e-mail to letters[a]phx.com