Heading for new seasons

My reaction to the announcement that Joseph Ratzinger was the new Pope was an irrepressible, "Oh no", a deflation of the anticipation built up in this one groping soul among so many expectant millions, as I heard news of the loaded white puffs of smoke break over my car radio, and sped home to watch history unfold on television.

I felt disappointed only in part because of the former cardinal's reputation as a doctrinal conservative, who had almost single-handedly rooted out liberal theologians, like Hans Küng, who have been trying to reposition the Church to make the message of Christ more meaningful, in their view, to humanity.

The eve-of-conclave public hard pitches by former Cardinal Ratzinger for a not-quite ecumenical supremacy of Catholicism relative to other religions, as well as, so it seemed, for the Papacy, had accentuated my personal reservations.

More than that, however, I was taken aback because, I felt, the time was surely ripe for the Catholic Church to become manifestly more catholic, to truly be seen to achieve universality, by having as its new Pope someone from Africa or Latin America. Not just 'someone' - as Bishop Desmond Tutu put it before the conclave commenced, it would not matter if the new Pope did not have his pigmentation: it was his views which were relevant.

Among the Third World cardinals there are those whose conservatism is not diluted by the aspects of their nearness to problems of the poor, due to the ravages of political corruption, social neglect and other rampant social injustice, and to massive debt burdens.

There are also those whose theological credentials and commitment are unquestionable, but whose outlook to life in general, to the relationship between man and man, as they also impinge on faith and hope, are inspiring - not because they are progressive, but because they take reality into full account.

Cardinal Ratzinger, his high-profile conservatism aside, was known to possess a formidable intellect. He was not recognised to have deployed it to address also social issues with a determination similar, if not equal, to his resolute stand since the leftist waves of the Sixties made him shift from being a progressive reformist to a hard-line "Vatican defender of doctrinal orthodoxy", as it has been pithily put by various commentators, both before and after he became Pope Benedict XVI.

Instant first reactions, springing from one's subjective expectations, always have to be revisited to allow for fuller appraisal, if they are not to harden into prejudice. Whatever one's status, one remains an individual, no less so for being a cardinal. He has his own views, within such spectrum as is permissible within the ultimate parameters of faith, which by definition have to be narrower than the horizons of rational argument.

When a cardinal becomes Pope, though ultimate individuality will remain, he becomes the head of all the Church. The shepherd of all his flock, including any inclined to move off somewhat from the well-trodden path.

That recognition did not prevent disappointed voices from remarking, right after Joseph Ratzinger became Peter's 264th successor that, originating from Bavaria and having lived for so long in Rome, poverty to him had a different meaning to that more widely recognised in the Third World.

Such observation is neither rational nor fair. The poor feel poverty most. But if others were not fully conscious of the poor, absolute poverty may submerge for always more people than it already does to a terrible extent.

Pope Benedict XVI may have selected his self-description - a simple labourer in God's vineyard - very carefully for its deep and beautiful message, but without it striking too deep a chord in those who see avoidable poverty as a fundamental and persisting evil. Yet his own lifestyle in the Vatican was possibly more simple than that of many of us to whom relative or ample comfort has become a way of life.

And to suggest that Joseph Ratzinger cannot truly understand the plight of the poor is to diminish the spirituality inherent in the main expounder of the Gospel, now in the form of Pope Benedict.

The real question is one of priorities. Pope Benedict will not intentionally hold back from addressing with vigour the scourge of global poverty, and its causes. But his pronouncements over the years show that he is very concerned about the growing relative poverty, as he sees it, of an unqualified commitment to Church doctrine, and to the increasing poverty of the Church in Europe as manifested in the declining practice of the faith.

To those to whom doctrine has to be somewhat less 'doctrinal', as well as to those who believe that Ecumenism should truly embrace those whose belief in one God travels along tracks that may differ from those of the Catholic Church, and who also refute any suggestion of allocation of supremacy to it, Pope Benedict will have to be different from Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger.

There is already talk of a 'deal' being struck in the conclave, enabling the election of the new Pope to be concluded on only the fourth ballot. The world media have been carrying reports, emanating from Rome, that Cardinal Ratzinger gave private assurances to his moderate colleagues in the conclave that he would modify his hard line if elected Pope.

The assurances, say those reports, were enough for Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini, the reformers' candidate, to swing his votes behind his perceived rival for the sake of Church unity and a rapid result. (e.g. The Guardian, April 21).

Those who offer such an interpretation feel that it was reflected in Pope Benedict's first sermon on Wednesday, given in the Sistine Chapel, in Latin. He promised (limited) open and sincere dialogue with other religions, in what some saw as an attempt to soften his image. He said he would work tirelessly for full and visible unity for all Christians, but hinted other faiths would have to come to Catholicism.

"Expressions of goodwill are not enough for this, concrete actions that enter into souls and rouse consciences are needed, requiring of each the interior conversion that is a precondition for any progress along the path to ecumenism," the new Pope said.

Benedict XVI has just turned 78. I do not believe that he was chosen because he is relatively old, and so "expected" to be a transitional Pope. The cardinal, with his standing, massive intellect and experience of more than two decades in the bowels of the Vatican, at the side of John Paul II, was the major papabile, irrespective of the age factor. Because Cardinal Martini, who is the same age as the new Pope, has health problems, there was no other papabile of weight enough to be a real alternative, and so lead to deadlock and emergence of some surprise candidate, as most lately in the case of former Cardinal Karol Wojtyla.

The new Pope will be conscious of his age - who isn't? He is unlikely to loiter over implementing his agenda. That will have been in his mind before he became Pope. It will be modified, probably not radically so, by whatever was said in the secrecy of the conclave. And, perhaps above all, by events.

Events within the Catholic world itself - if the Faith continues to surge in Africa and Latin America, and to wane in the Old World of Europe, the Pope may have to recast his priorities, from revival in Europe to greater recognition of advance in the New World. The two objectives are not mutually exclusive.

It will be a question of which gets the higher priority, to the extent that one can prioritise, through visits, statements and also 'political' positioning.

Global political events too will affect the Papacy. There is no Iron Curtain to dismantle. But Russia is, by any means, not an easy reality. China, for all its relative inclusion in the world community, is a very uneasy fact for the Catholic Church, as for those who pay more attention to the tenets of individual freedom than to the rewards (and threats) of the economic opening-up of a huge market.

What will the Papacy of Benedict XVI mean for Malta? John Paul II lit up the Island with not just one visit, but two - a blessing that could not be more disproportionate to our tiny size.

Other than the beatifications he carried out, and aside from the common fall-out of his teachings and stances, and the inspiration that flowed from him on the world stage, it cannot be said that the long Papacy of John Paul II brought about discernible changes in our regard.

Pope Benedict will probably appoint new bishops for Malta and Gozo, not before very long, perhaps before the year is out. Archbishop Mercieca and Bishop Cauchi, now both in their 77th year, have both indicated they are more than ready to make way.

Apart from having passed the indicated retirement age of 75, they have been bearing their particular cross for a very long time. They do not complain, but it is time for change.

That will be brought more insistently to the attention of the Vatican, now. Pope Benedict will give us new bishops. Will he also give this outpost of Christianity - where so many at least profess, and many practise, though true Christianity does go on vacation occasionally - a cardinal?