PEOPLE AROUND THE POPE

Marxist analysis of the faith leads to atheism and armed revolution, Cardinal Hummes says

Sao Paulo, Nov. 02, 2006 (CNA) - The new Prefect of the Congregation for the Clergy, Cardinal Claudio Hummes, explained that a Marxist analysis (or view) of the faith "brings (theology) to materialism and atheism and leads to an armed revolution."

In an interview published by the Brazilian paper, O Globo, the prelate said he was consulted on the relations of the Vatican and Marxist-based Liberation Theology by then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger when he was the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith. Hummes said he held then, as he does now, that the use of a Marxist model brings a lot of politics to the Church.

"A great point of conflict was the use of the Marxist analysis inside theology. That produced a great disagreement between the Pope and some liberation theologians who were using it. In addition, the Marxist analysis brings (theology) to materialism and atheism and leads to an armed revolution", indicated the new Prefect.

"With Liberation Theology, some theologians were using a Marxist view as an analysis of reality, as if the Marxist analysis was scientific. Pope John Paul II offered a warning about this and of course Cardinal Ratzinger and I concurred," he added.

"The Marxist analysis is a much more an ideological analysis than a scientific one," he explained. Likewise, he was consulted regarding the social problems that affect many Catholic communities and clarified that there are urgent issues like "conquering poverty, the question of employment, the question of fair wages, the rights of workers.” However, Hummes notes, the Marxist ideology has not solved the problems.

I think, Hummes continued, "the world has changed. Clearly it has changed as we all change and we should change with history. One cannot use the same thoughts and practices of 1980’s today."

Cardinal Hummes is preparing to travel to the Vatican in a few weeks to assume his new post, and is awaiting the appointment of his successor as Archbishop of San Paulo.

The cardinal says he is "optimistic" about the Pontificate of Pope Benedict XVI and hopes for some "good surprises."

For Cardinal Hummes, the world has created a distorted image of the Holy Father. "He is a very intelligent man, very kind, very fine, very wise, very friendly, and very goodhearted."

"The world has made him a caricature, due to his responsibilities as the Prefect of the Doctrine of Faith, where once in awhile he had to say: 'Look, that does not belong to our faith,'" Hummes affirmed.

[Modificato da benefan 03/11/2006 19.37]

Cardinal Hummes's interview with O Globo above gives us a beautiful insight into the thinking of the new Prefect for the Congregation of the Clergy - especially his view of liberation theology - as a man who thinks and feels 'with the Church' and therefore with the Pope.

In the 11/4/06 issue of the British Catholic magazine The Tablet, www.thetablet.co.uk/articles/8863/
Vatican correspondent Robert Mickens also helps us have a fuller portrait of Cardinal Hummes.

================================================================

Simple friar and
man of dialogue
By Robert Mickens


"I always knew that I would return from the Vatican as Archbishop of São Paulo, and not as Pope." That's what Cardinal Cláudio Hummes OFM, the man many tipped as Brazil's most obvious recent candidate for the papacy, said when he arrived home in April 2005 from the last conclave.

The 72-year-old archbishop probably never imagined that only a year and a half later he would be heading back to the Vatican, this time to be prefect of the Congregation for the Clergy.

But Pope Benedict XVI this week asked "Dom Cláudio", as the Franciscan is commonly known, to bring his more than 30 years of pastoral experience as a diocesan bishop to the Church's bureaucratic headquarters.

Some have caricatured the cardinal; others have mythologised him. The appointment on 31 October sparked curiosity among many people as well as generating a flood of news stories.

Some conservatives immediately cited Cardinal Hummes' longstanding friendship with Brazil's leftist President, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, as proof that he is a closet Marxist in prelate's clothing. [Then they should read the interview with O Globo above!]

But on the other side of the church "divide", activist Catholics involved in social justice issues shook their heads in disagreement. They believe the new prefect is a man who has steadily become more conservative in direct relation to his metamorphosis from simple Franciscan friar to cardinal archbishop in the biggest diocese of the world's largest Catholic country.

Both portraits, it seems, are in some ways correct, yet neither adequately captures the essence of Dom Cláudio. And neither gives a clue as to why the 79-year-old Pope Benedict gave him one of the top jobs in the Vatican.

Auri Alfonso Hummes (he took the name Cláudio when he made profession as a Franciscan) was born on 8 August 1934 in the village of Batinga Sul in the Archdiocese of Porto Alegre. A third-generation Brazilian of German ancestry, he was the third of what eventually would be 13 children.

He joined the Franciscan Order of Friars Minor in his teens and, after preliminary studies in Brazil, was ordained a priest in 1958, just a few days before his twenty-fourth birthday. He was sent to Rome to study for a doctorate in philosophy at his order's university, the Antonianum. And when he became a cardinal in 2001, Pope John Paul II designated the parish connected to the institute, St Anthony of Padua, as his titular church.

The young Dom Cláudio spent a year - 1968 - in Geneva, where he studied ecumenism, before returning to Brazil to teach. He quickly rose to leadership in his order, becoming Provincial Superior in 1972. But the experience was short-lived. In 1975 Pope Paul VI appointed him Bishop of Santo André, an industrial city on the outskirts of São Paulo.

It was there that the myth of Cláudio the "labour bishop" was born. As Brazil's military dictatorship and factory workers clashed, the new Bishop Hummes allowed the labour unions to meet in parishes throughout his diocese. It was here that he forged his friendship with the union boss at the time, the man known simply as Lula.

But as the young bishop matured he began distancing himself from the radical - and certainly Marxist - elements in Lula's leftist labour movement.

Still, Bishop Hummes remained outspoken in defence of the poor and especially the landless. However, he strenuously opposed the forceful taking of land, even though he continued to demand justice for those who had no homes.

In 1996, after 21 years in Santo André, the now 61-year-old bishop was sent to the Archdiocese of Fortaleza to take over from the hugely popular Cardinal Aloísio Lorscheider OFM. His Franciscan confrère had been archbishop there for 20 years and the move was unpopular.

But Dom Cláudio was able to make the transition without great controversy and - despite some early opposition by a group of priests - he distinguished himself as a man willing to engage in dialogue with all groups and people.

Yet, like his time as Provincial Superior of the Franciscans, his tenure in Fortaleza was to be brief. Only two years later he was transferred to São Paolo to take over from yet another immensely revered and loved Franciscan, Cardinal Paulo Evaristo Arns OFM.

Vatican officials who are familiar with Cardinal Hummes note that he has remained a "simple friar" at heart. He is considered "loyal" to the Vatican line on all major moral and ethical questions, yet he has been characteristically "non-doctrinaire", as one official said.

"He is extremely discreet, soft-spoken, and someone who shuns the spotlight," said one Brazilian priest who lives in Rome.

Even though the cardinal is considered a "youngish" 72-year-old, he said, his age shows that "the Pope is forming a transitional government". In fact, Pope Benedict has chosen men who are all over 70 (Cardinals Levada, Dias, and Bertone) for the few top Roman Curia jobs he has handed out up to now.

[Because they are over 70, they should be considered transitional? Many cardinals live to be beyond 80, and if Pope Benedict XVI finds his appointees to be the right men for their respective jobs, he will probably keep them on beyond age 75, health permitting, as Pope John Paul II kept him on.

I also wish Mickens had given us an idea of what is the usual age at which cardinals are appointed to head a major Curial office. Was Cardinal Ratzinger being named at age 54 an unusual thing, for instance?]

One veteran official in the Curia added that the Pope had chosen Cardinal Hummes just as he has chosen others: "to repay those who supported him in the conclave". The claim is impossible to substantiate, but it is not implausible.
[But it is petty, and attributes pettiness to the Pope himself! A Curial appointment is not like political patronage, and Vatican reporters should stop reporting Vatican news as if they were reporting on ordinary politicians - even if many prelates may behave like ordinary politicians.

Isn't it more logical to say that the Pope - after assuring himself that his prospective nominee has the appropriate qualifications for the post - would also take into account whether the nominee's known views are in consonance with his own, or are they so divergent that they would not be able to work together? And if they have compatible views, then it would also mean that very likely, the nominee voted for Ratzinger in the Conclave, but that would be because they share his views on major issues involving the Church!

So a Curial nomination is certainly an expression of appreciation for the nominee's person, abilities and proven track record, but a straight quid pro quo because he voted for the Pope? Surely not!]

Pope Benedict XVI would not have been elected without support from the Latin American cardinals and, as one of the leading candidates from the region, Cardinal Hummes would have had a "packet of votes" that he could have directed towards the man who was chosen. [ But according to most published reports, Ratzinger already had the majority of Latin American cardinals behind him going into the Conclave - with men like Cardinal Castrillo Hoyos 'campaigning' among Third World cardinals outside Latin America in behalf of Ratzinger.]

As prefect of the Congregation for the Clergy the cardinal will be spared the burden of dealing with clerical sexual abuse cases, since those are now handled exclusively in Rome at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. But his office does handle requests for dispensation from active priestly ministry, as well as the legislation governing presbyteral councils and other organisations of priests around the world.

Cardinal Hummes arrives as vocations to the priesthood continue to plummet in the Western world. At last year's bishops' synod on the Eucharist he said this was a problem even in Brazil. "For every Catholic priest," he mused, "we have two Protestant ministers, mostly evangelicals."

While Brazilian churchmen such as Cardinals Lorscheider and Arns have spoken about the need to at least discuss the possibility of ordaining married men as priests, Cardinal Hummes has been reticent on the point. But he is not opposed to dialogue. Quite the contrary.

"The cardinal is very open to everyone," said a Brazilian priest who teaches in Rome. "He truly believes in dialogue, a so-called ‘servant Church of the poor', and one that is not overbearing," he said.

He noted that, even though it is not Cardinal Hummes' "cup of tea", as it were, he initiated the usage of the Tridentine Mass in São Paulo, solely because a group of people in the archdiocese asked for it.

"My father, who died at the age of 94, always knew Cláudio would go far," one of the cardinal's younger brothers, Arthemio, told a Brazilian newspaper when Hummes was being talked about as a candidate for pope at the last Conclave. "He used to say that Cláudio would reach the last rung of the Church's ladder and serve as an example to the rest of the world."

Some people are wondering whether Cardinal Hummes' appointment to head a major office in the Roman Curia will be only a temporary stop on the penultimate rung of that ladder. The experience would round out his credentials. If so, Pope Benedict XVI will have had a hand - wittingly or not - in fulfilling a Brazilian father's prophecy.

[Obviously, Hummes has jumped to the top of the 'papabili' list kept by most Vatican watchers but it is still unseemly and improper to be talking about such prospects at this time!]

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 04/11/2006 19.24]

Hummes can be "papabile" all the press wants, but remember that Tettamanzi was their favorite in 2005 and he got all of 2 votes.

VATICAN: TOP CLERIC SLAMS SATIRE OF POPE

Rome, 14 Nov. (AKI) - Pope Benedict XVI's personal secretary Georg Gaenswein on Tuesday slammed a TV and radio satire of the pontiff and himself. "I hope it stops right away," Gaenswein told Adnkronos. "I hope these programmes will end immediately: satire is fine but these things have no intellectual level and offend men of the Church. They are not acceptable."

Gaenswein's comments follow an article in Avvenire - the newspaper of the Italian Bishops' Conference - which slammed a satire of the pope by comedian Maurizio Crozza on private television channel La7 and the imitation, by another popular Italian showman, Fiorello, of the pontiff's secretary in a radio programme on state broadcaster RAI Viva Radio 2.

Avvenire lashed out at the programmes saying they were trying to "ridicule Catholic figures."

Gaenswein stressed that he would never watch nor listen to these programmes and noted he wanted "to forget" the entire episode.

He also stressed the pontiff had never commented on the programmes: "A comment of the pope would really honour too much these people."

I had been wondering whether to bring up this subject at all which has been the object of much discussion in the main forum, for the simple reason that it involves some Italian TV comedian who fancies himself an impersonator and who has apparently been doing the most tasteless, vulgar and pointless impersonations of Benedict.

In an editorial, Avvenire described the act this way:
"In Crozza's skit, Benedict XVI is shown as a hysterical character assisted by two cardinals acting like acolytes, someone preoccupied with making up good lines for his public speeches, out of touch with the world, someone who moves like a puppet, with a ring on every finger. What does it have to do with the real Pope? Nothing whatsoever. If satire consists in exggerating a defect or a tic in order to sitgmatize its object, then this one is a failure."

Then apparently, another comedian plays the Georg Gaenswein character in a radio skit as a preening person preoccupied with his looks and his clothes, and playing 'curling' (the Olympic sport) in the Apostolic Palace. Who announces that the Pope has been smoking three packs of cigarettes daily like a Turk to prepare for his trip to Turkey!

Does anyone think this is even funny at all? And why target the Pope if they really have nothing to say about him, except to put him up as an object of ridicule? This is not satire at all - it is mindless and malicious parody, and Avvenire was paying Crozza an unmerited compliment by calling his act 'satire.'

Even worse, the TV station's executive has defended this whole act by saying "Well, there aren't any figures in government who can be parodied," adding that Prodi and his ministers do not lend themselves to lampooning the way Berlusconi and his ministers did.

So, is that a reason to turn on the Pope? Why not Bin Laden, the terrorists, the Mafia, Tom Cruise, Madonna? The papers are full of true absurdities that can be so skillfully mined for laughs and/or satirized! Ah, but then Crozza and his ilk would risk physical danger, if not death, hitting such targets!

But the Pope is fair game, just as Jesus Christ and Catholicism have been fair game for the rest of the media - because the Pope would not, could not, and should not descend to their level; because Christians as a whole have taken all the abuse in the media without any protest, more or less; and because no matter how offended the Pope or Catholics may be, they will not
strike out and harm the offenders.

I have absolutely no idea what kind of ratings this Crozza has (and I doubt seriously that he can even approach the 20% audience share that Benedict draws at a minimum with the Angelus!) but is the kind of audience he is likely to get with his brand of 'humor' the kind that is likely to boycott him because he has been so blatantly disrespectful of the Pope? I wouldn't hold my breath.

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 15/11/2006 7.03]

What can one say? These people really are rather pathetic. The crass stupidity of it all will probably strike even the Pope's and Gaenswein's greatest enemies.

Well, the popular press has been satirizing Pope Benedict's "clothing" since he was elected. You know, the "fashion" Pope, as Rocco Palmo has called him. The caricature of Mr. Ganswein has a ring of truth, however. He does seem to be very conscious of his hair and his figure and how he looks in photos.

Do people think it was appropriate that Mons Ganswein commented publicly on this nonsense?

Teresa, I agree, the whole thing is disgusting and makes me feel ill. At least we on this forum haven't stooped to the level of putting links to videos of this obscene television show.
Mary x

That's so insulting.
Garbage like that shouldn't be allowed on TV.

All Ganswein did by commenting on the TV show and the comedians was to put the cntroversy on the front page. I'm sure the Pope didn't want THAT. I think Ganswein was more offended because HE was presented as a vain, pretty-boy than by anything that was done to the Pope. He's never spoken out before, you notice, just when the humor concerned him. And these skits, etc., were so lame and really stupid. They should have just been ignored. Ganswein saying he's "had enough" of them was so presumptuous and childish, it makes him look bad and makes the Pope look bad, as well.

Is it OK to poke fun at Pope? Italians ask

Wed Nov 15, 2006 2:15 PM GMT
By Philip Pullella

ROME (Reuters) - Forget the bloated deficit, forget the fact that Italy's national airlines and train network may go bust; the hottest debate in the country now is whether it is politically correct to make the Pope the butt of comic satire.

That was the question on most front pages of Italy's newspapers on Wednesday after the Roman Catholic officials reacted to a spate of Italian television and radio programmes poking fun at Pope Benedict.

"The Vatican doesn't like satire," headlined Rome's La Repubblica.

L'Unita, the newspaper of the largest party in the centre-left government, even put its banner headline -- "The Vatican Can't Take a Joke" -- above its story about the state railway system being "on the brink of bankruptcy".

In one TV programme, comedian Maurizio Crozza, dressed in white papal robes, imitates Benedict's distinct German accent as he sits behind a desk flanked by two Swiss Guards in ceremonial blue, red and yellow uniform.

Crozza does a satirical play on two identical sounding words -- Pax (peace) and PACS, the acronym for a controversial law that would give unwed heterosexual couples and gay couples in Italy equal civil rights. He says "pax (or PACS) be with you".

The Pope and the Roman Catholic Church oppose introducing the PACS law.

In a radio programme, a duo of comedians imitate the Pope and his priest-secretary, Monsignor Georg Ganswein, a 50-year-old German whose boyish good looks have made him a minor celebrity in the Italian media.

One says to the other that the Pope has started smoking three packs of cigarettes a day "like a Turk" in order to prepare himself for his trip to Turkey this month.

In Italy, the phrase "smoking like a Turk" means a very heavy smoker. The Pope is a non-smoker.

The controversy started last week when the Catholic newspaper Avennire blasted the shows and hit the headlines on Wednesday after Ganswein was reported to have told an Italian news agency that he had had enough of satire about his boss.

While some newspapers defended the Pope, L'Unita said any curbs on artistic freedom would be a "crusade" by the Vatican.

"In what times are we living?" asked an editorial headlined "Free Satire in a Free Country". It said Italians should not accept any attempt at censorship and added that "this all smells a little like fundamentalism".

A long editorial in Corriere della Sera, Italy's largest-selling mainstream newspaper, criticised the satires, calling them "a sad gag".

"The Teutonic accent of the German Pope may be the stuff of a comic sketch but there are a billion people accustomed to calling him 'Holy Father' and everyone wants to see a minimum of respect for their father, if only for his age," it said.

But perhaps an editorial cartoon on Wednesday had the last word on what some consider a tempest in a chalice.

One character said the TV and radio sketches of the Pope left a lot to be desired and the other responded that Pope was actually funnier than the comedians trying to imitate him.

[Modificato da benefan 17/11/2006 3.52]

Italian satirists target the Pope

They imitate Pope Benedict XVI’s German-accented Italian, poke fun at his secretary and even have the pontiff shooting pigeons in St Peter’s Square.

The pope and the Vatican have long been a favourite target in a country where satirists hold little sacred, but Italy’s Roman Catholic bishops and others now complain that the current crop of comedians is going too far.

“You can’t joke about the Vatican,” was the banner headline today in the left-wing daily L’Unita, which denounced a “crusade against satire” by Catholic media and conservative politicians.

“This is Catholic fundamentalism, a faithful mirror of certain Islamic fundamentalists who don’t want cartoons about Allah,” the paper wrote in an editorial, drawing comparisons to the uproar in the Muslim world by cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed in Danish and other European newspapers earlier this year.

The popular comedian Fiorello imitates the pope’s secretary, Monsignor Georg Ganswein, representing him as a hip, sporty and very vain prelate.

The comedian uses him to talk about the pope.

“He’s smoking like a Turk – three packs a day – to prepare for his upcoming trip to Turkey,” he had the secretary saying recently on his radio show, using the Italian expression for a chainsmoker.

The Maurizio Crozza satire on TV is stronger, with a hysterical pope shooting pigeons on his ledge over St Peter’s Square because they disturb “people who have work to do” or throwing burning candies to the “dear children” in the square.

Avvenire, the daily newspaper of the Italian Bishops Conference, said that Fiorello was “bravissimo, but even he has his off moments,” while it termed Crozza humour as “failed satire which is not without cowardice.”

Many commentators, both left and right, partially backed the criticism of the satire saying that Italian comedians attacking the church were picking on an easy target, while staying clear of references to Islam.

“It would be easy and rightful to champion free satire if only it were exercised impartially, in all directions,” the left-leaning daily La Repubblica wrote in an editorial.

“You can’t satirise one prophet and not the other, you can’t satirise Christ and spare, out of fear, Mohammed.”

“Between an Islamic religion that doesn’t accept even a cartoon and a Catholic one forced to feed the tired fantasies of humour there should be a middle way,” said the moderate daily Corriere della Sera.

The Vatican had no official comment, but Italian newspapers carried comments by the pope’s secretary dismissing the satire as “unacceptable” and insisting that Benedict never watched or listened to the programs.

I think I've heard it all now! And to think I've been complaining about how revolting British television has become! I agree, Monsignor Gaenswein should have remained silent. If this sort of thing is ignored, it goes away.
Bood [phoenixrising] and I have both been sickened by all this and the fact that attention was drawn to the videos [not here] made us physically shake when we were discussing it on MSN. We both love our Papa dearly and can't bear anything that may upset or hurt him. I just hope he, personally, neither heard nor saw any of it. If he did, he's doubtless stronger than either Bood or I and just shrugged or chuckled and then went on with important matters. I like to think so.
Some years ago [before television in Brtain really became gross] we had an Irish comedian called Dave Allen. He was a lapsed Catholic who really knew the Church from the inside. He used to sit and joke quietly about the Catholic Church and, somehow, he didn't deeply offend. I don't remember that he ever did a skit on the Pope of the time, though I may be wrong. He seemed to joke in the way that Catholics can laugh at themselves and their foibles, just as Jews can.Jews are very good at it and never offend.
Mary x

I really don't think any of this upsets the Pope. Remember when he was at the CDF he was called EVERYTHING insulting. And he seems to have a quite good sense of humor and to be quite serene. I think Ganswein stepped out of turn here. I'll be interested to see how they interact, since now it is front page news. I don't think the Pope would have told him to issue such a reprimand to the Italian news media. I think Ganswein just had his own feathers ruffled because for once HE was in the sketch and spoke out and made it worse.

Yes, I think GG must have done this without consulting Papa, in which case one wonders if he will be reprimanded. I am certain Papa is more than capable of telling people off. I think GG acted a bit like a "twerp" [as we would say in England], in this instance.

My husband worked with some Jewish people when he was in London and he assures me there are books of Jewish humour. There are certainly books of Christian humour, such as "Bats in the Belfry" and "Hot under the Collar" - they are hugely funny and can be bought in Christian bookshops.

The kind of "humour" discussed above is an insult to the word satire, as someone pointed out. Unlike the stupid "Monty Python" it isn't even puerile.....and one wonders what sort of brain would have thought it up.

We are still left with the fact that it's all right to ridicule Christ, His Church and the Successor of Peter, but don't do it to Mohammed or Islam!


Take up the rosary and pray!
Mary x

While I agree that Georg Gaenswein appears to be self-serving in his comments considering that he was also the object of ridicule, not just the Pope, the discussion in the Italian media about these tasteless stupid parodies - which everyone in Italy refers to as 'satira' because Italian has the same word for satire and lampoon, when in fact these two words mean completely different things - started days before Gaenswein's comments were reported.

And that included double editorials in Avvenire against the very idea of lampooning the Pope for no other reason than to provoke cheap laughs (of which there were very little, apparently). Avvenire ran its editorials shortly after the first of the series [the comedian claims he will continue doing it] of 'skits' that have since come out.

The underlying principle is that lampooning the Pope - quite apart from being grossly disrespectful - is equivalent to an attack on the Catholic church and its believers, and that if Western media are studiously inhibiting themselves from saying anything negative about Islam after the Danish cartoon brouhaha, why can't they observe the same respect for the Catholic religion and the things and persons it holds in respect?

But even if Gaenswein had a self-interest to serve in making his comments, that does not make the comments invalid. If he had not been also an object of ridicule himself, then it would have been perfectly OK for him to have denounced the vulgarity. In fact, he would have had to do it, if he were asked for a comment, as he apparently was.

As it is, his reported comments pushed the secular Italian newspapers, including Corriere della Sera, to editorialize the next day against these purveyors of disrespect and bad taste, particularly against a figure (the Pope) and an institution (the Papacy) that cannot defend itself against pettiness no matter how malicious.

P.S. I just saw Avvenire has another editorial about the whole issue in its 11/17/06 edition. It says in part -

"For the first time ever, the figure of the Pope is targeted by television and radio in a way that completely ignores the real person, which has invented a simulacrum to make people laugh at the person and at the institution. For the first time, this offense is committed 'cold' - unconnected to any event, devoid of any substantial content or objection to the Pope, not even in the hypothetical sense. There is no basis for 'satire' - only pure invention and ridicule."

Not having an equivalent for 'lampoon,' the Italian media perhaps ought to use the word 'caricatura' instead of 'satira'.

Strictly speaking, satire is a criticism expressed in humorous terms, and the most successful satires make even the object of the satire laugh.

A lampoon or a parody is something else. Also meant to be funny, but because it holds up someone or something to ridicule. And it falls flat when the parody itself has no basis. What, in effect, was this comedian lampooning about the Pope?

1 - His German accent. So laugh at the way he cannot manage the hard consonants of Italian and English - but is that a cause for objection or for running ridicule? He speaks perfect Italian - better perhaps than his comedian-lampooner does, and even native speakers of French and Spanish (which do not have those troublesome hard consonants) find his spoken French and Spanish exquisite!

2 - His supposed insecurity about being compared to John Paul II. That is so absurd it doesn't deserve comment. Maybe Avvenire will post comments from their readers one of these days, as they usually do on occasions like these.

3 - Being at a loss for words! - One skit apparently has the Pope panicking just before coing to the study window for the Angelus message, because he has no text and does not know what he will say!

Now, that is probably the most ridiculous thing ever levelled against someone who, from his days as a young lecturer, was called Goldmund for his facility with words - and who, as this idiot obviously does not know, has improvised homilies and speeches again and again as Pope (something no Pope before him ever did, not even John Paul except when he gave brief off-the-cuff answers to the press).

The unrepentant culprit commented about the Angelus skit that "Of course, I respect the Pope" [He obviously has a wrong idea of what 'respect' is] but that he merely wanted to show the Pope as someone who is "preparing to go onstage" and like most performers, "would be concerned about how he looks, what he will say, how he will perform". Which, of course, makes it worse because the idiot considers these prayers and messages a performance and the Pope a showman.

[The unfortunate effect of JP-II's media savvy was that it led most people in the media to look at the Pope as a showman - something that was never even thought of before JP-II. And he must have been continually mortified that he was being portrayed as a showman and his appearances as 'shows.']

So then, what is the basis for this ongoing ridicule of Papa Ratzinger? Obviously, nothing but a perverse personal choice by the TV performer and his writers - because the Pope is a target who will not and cannot (and should not) deign to answer back [even if others will take up the cudgels for him, as they have and properly so], and more importantly, who won't send terrorists to hunt them down or blow them up.

As mindless as this TV performer may be, you do not ignore a continuing assault on the Pope. That is why this has become such an issue.

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 17/11/2006 18.41]

Teresa, please. It would have been far better for Ganswein to ignore the whole thing. All he did was show that he's not ready for prime time. Anyone in public life gets lampooned. That's the way it is, whether they are a political or a religious figure. The skit was stupid in the extreme; that goes without saying. But Ganswein had obviously seen it and was reacting to it, no matter what he said, because it lampooned HIM perfectly: the fastidious attention to his hair and figure and clothing. The Pope never pays attention to himself. He always, God bless him, looks like he was poured into his clothes and they never fit quite right and he just doesn't really care. But Ganswein obviously DOES care about his clothes, etc. and he's really angry that everyone knows that he's vain. So he reacted publicly. Not a good idea. I bet the Pope is either amused by Ganswein's anger or a bit ticked off that he escalated a really minor thing into a front page story.

For those who unsertand Spanish I have posted in "Personas Cercanas a Benecto XVI" an article and a link to the comments from the blog "Rumores de Àngeles"

Chickadee, hello. I'm not a Gaenswein-fan, like some of the young ones here and elsewhere - I'm too old to fall off my chair when I see someone nice-looking who could almost be my child. But the little I see of Gaenswein doesn't put me off either. I'm just curious about your remarks (not for the first time)about his preoccupation with his looks, his so called "vainness" etc. Why do you say these things, I'm curious to know? Is it general knowledge around Rome/in Germany, or what? I mean, is it a proven fact or just some "jealous" rumouring going around? You seem very convinced of your criticism of GG, so much so that it is beginning to look like first-hand knowledge. Can you share with us your factual sources or is your reaction based on intuition and subconscious dislike of the man? Personally, I just can't think the Pope would choose a proud, vain peacock to have around him all the time.