He went. He saw. He conquered

There is a common thread uniting many papal visits. The media run-up to the visit is framed in terms of controversy. They project the welcoming country as being more secularised that it in fact is.

The media do not do this because they have an explicit anti-Pope or anti-Catholic agenda. For a number of reasons too complex to explain here, the media have developed a concept of news that generally gives most importance to whatever is controversial, bizarre and divisive. News bulletins increasingly follow the logic of entertainment programmes.

In many instances, market-driven journalism has supplanted normative journalism. When the international media discuss popes, presidents, politicians and other high-calibre personalities they give greatest importance to anything out of the ordinary or that can be construed as controversial.

The Pope visited the UK in an engineered atmosphere of tension and conflict. Reality turned out to be different. Many more people turned up to welcome Benedict than expected. The number of protesters was much lower than what we were promised.

In fairness, one must admit that the media came clean and reflected the real mood of the country during the visit. The Times in the UK wrote “Ratzinger the Rottweiler transformed into Benny the bunny. We all want to cuddle up to him and get him to bless our babies.”

The outcome does not surprise me for two reasons. The first has to do with the Pope’s personality. There is a big difference between the stereotype of Pope Benedict and the real Pope Benedict.

His is portrayed as a tough person (hence the Rottweiler metaphor) and having a cold personality. On closer contact, Benedict comes across as a humble, warm and unassuming person. He is anything but threatening.

The second reason has to do with his speeches, which are deep, direct, clear and enlightening. One cannot listen to him without feeling that one is in the presence of a wise man (and not just a very knowledgeable one).

His speeches are very relevant to contemporary society. To the Queen, he spoke of the role of Christian values in society. The homily of the Mass in Glasgow was about the importance of the evangelisation of culture, especially in our times, “in which an insidious relativism threatens to darken the unchanging truth about the nature of man”.

When he met the youths and adolescents educated in Church schools he encouraged them “not to follow limited goals, or to satisfy themselves with comfortable choices but to aim at something greater: the search for true happiness, which is to be found only in God”.

He gave other great speeches, but his address to the representatives of British society, including the diplomatic corps, politicians, academics and business leaders, was a gem.

Do not take my word for it; do not rely on summaries. Feast yourself on the whole speech, available at www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2010/september/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20100917_societa-civile_en.html.

I hope to comment on it in the near future.

Cynics will ask which problems affecting UK society or the Church he solved. Pope Benedict did something better. He built a bridge to the hearts of many British people. Is there anything more important that he could have done?

P.S. I read the postscript written by Roamer’s last Sunday. I then re-read what I had written about him the Sunday before. I think my comments were too personal and uncalled for. I apologise for attacking him instead of tackling his arguments which, in my opinion, are mistaken and not beneficial to the cause he champions so gallantly and fervently.

joseph.borg@um.edu.mt