Two things stand out from the Pope’s visit. First, his power of attraction. From the welcoming ceremony at the White House to the Youth Rally in New York, Benedict XVI drew tremendous, overflowing crowds. And their size was matched by their enthusiasm.
The thousands of priests and religious who gathered with him in St. Patrick’s Cathedral gushed with three separate standing ovations and deafening applause that went on, and on, and on. The U.N. General Assembly gave him a standing ovation. The 20,000 young people who squeezed onto the rally lawn at Dunwoodie cheered so loudly and so often that the elderly Pope spent more time grinning than talking.
How to explain such power of attraction?
I think highly of this pope but I can not conceive of ovation for a man of the cloth. It seems so out of charactor for most any situation.
Don
Obviously, DonGander, you weren’t in San Diego a few weeks ago with +KJS made a visit here 😉 – from Episcopal Life – “The Presiding Bishop received a standing ovation from more than 600 people when she walked through the door at Good Samaritan Episcopal Church on Saturday afternoon for a public forum coordinated with the campus ministry program serving nearby UCSD.”
I know that some find the popular acclaim of the pope hard to stomach. But a great many catholics do love the man. And I think that in our culture, there just is no other commonly accepted way of signifying this in the context of very large public gatherings. If there were another way, I am sure that people would embrace it with enthusiasm*. But it seems somehow cruel to suggest that people should not express what they feel, in the exceedingly rare situation (perhaps once in a lifetime) when they have the opportunity to do so.
* Suggestions, please!
* Suggestions, please!
I just see the pope as a pastor and, as such, I look to them to have the same attitude that Christ had. He said “If you love me, applaud!” No, He said, “If you love me, keep My commandments”.
I’d really like to expand on this but time is my enemy just now.
Don
This is an interesting piece. I question though the author’s mention of Benedict’s supposed “colossal faith in human nature.” The little bit I heard from the Pope was that humanity (and he being no exception) is deeply flawed, saved only by the grace of God. In terms of the acclaim he received, I do not begrudge a single Roman Catholic the right or opportunity to express his/her love for the man. I felt exactly the same way about Billy Graham when I attended his crusade in San Antonio in 1997.
#4, I don’t see the incompatibility between faith in Our Lord and obedience to his commandments, and a bit of effervescence at a once-in-a-lifetime public jamboree. Surely an effective leader should take this enthusiasm and point it in the right direction, not sententiously wag his finger!
#5, re “faith in human nature” – you are absolutely right, I think.
Perhaps the Pope accepts it as a “clap offering to the Lord”. I doubt he lets it go to his head. He is where he is only because the Lord is where He is. Ps. 47 would be a great read about now.
Two years ago, we got a new bishop for our Catholic diocese. Our former bishop had been ill for over 2 years prior to that, and the diocese was, more or less, being run by senior priests. Anyway, the day before the new man was to be ordained and installed as co-adjutor, our bishop died, so they ordained and installed him as the diocesan. The ordination/installation was held in a large arena and when the new bishop was seated, spontaneous cheering and applause erupted. Then, as he moved around the arena, greeting each section of the arena, that section stood, cheering and clapping. It was just… uncatholic! 🙂 But it was so good to have a bishop again.
Here’s my point: the relationships of Catholics to their priests and bishops is complicated. We need them. We love them. Sometimes, with a wry sort of love that shrugs and rolls its eyes. But it’s a connection that after all these years, I am just coming to appreciate. The pope’s visit reinforced this for me: I was so GLAD seeing him do what Peggy Noonan called “theater of substantive acts. The cheering is, yes, a bit of theater. But it’s a substantive expression of a relationship that, frankly, I find surprising.
[blockquote]His friendship with Jesus Christ is so deep that he has absolutely no doubt about the power of God’s grace to change hearts. His hope in Christ is limitless, and so his hope in people, the recipients of Christ’s love, is unwavering.[/blockquote]
This is the money quote. I’ve heard the leaders of CANA share this same belief and it does set folk on fire for the Lord, mainly because those of us who heard it know they believe and live it and many of us have experienced it in our own lives.
Those who hold that sacraments are symbols that effect what they symbolize are neither surprised nor disheartened by this.
#3
In earlier centuries, the crowds would have knelt. If there were adequate space, it would seem appropriate today as well.
Yes, but when we kneel, we get accused of worshipping a man… sigh…heavy sigh…
Kneeling really is appropriate, but the use of secular venues makes it problematic. In the case of Yankee Stadium, it was probably impossible. So the choice comes down to using a church and limiting the crowd (as they did at St. Pat’s) or use a large secular space. I’m glad that when we got our new bishop, they took the latter option.
No. 9 – And I’ve heard the same many times inmy ECUSA parish.