The new style of communication adopted by Pope Benedict XVI is examined in a long comment in The Catholic Herald (02/09), signed by Austen Ivereigh, director of public affairs of the archdiocese of Westminster, where the bishop is Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor. “ I was not alone in being surprised to discover that, instead of an ‘Armada’, a humble man arrived in Cologne, a man almost uncertain as he got off the boat after his trip on the Rhine. No crusader, here; he brought to mind, rather, a professor who had just ended a lecture“. Examining the homily pronounced before the million or so youth in the Marienfeld, Ivereigh emphasises that “ it was not a ‘manifesto’, nor even rhetoric prefabricated for TV. It was on the contrary a superb piece of old-style catechism, without any fear of being bookish, which enabled the young to recognize that he did not want to conquer or blandish them“. “ In the age of CNN or MTV continues the comment you really need boldness to explain the Eucharist in front of a million young people, and to dwell on the nuances of the word ‘adoration’ in Greek (proskynesis, in case you didn’t know)“. According to Ivereigh, “ Benedict is a superb conceptualizer” and “ on him is incumbent the task of explaining why the Church believes in what it believes, of showing that what it teaches really does make us free“. The role of Benedict XVI is radically different from that of his predecessors, according to Ivereigh. “ The ‘city triumphant’ has gone. That of Benedict is the age of the leaven in the dough, of small vibrant groups in the parishes, of the movements and associations that operate like underground cells, attracting believers and supporting the vitality the Church needs below the surface“. The comment ends with the following conclusion: “ Pope Benedict has a style of his own and he also has a strategy of his own. If we find it difficult to implement, it may be that our eyes have a need to ‘adjust themselves’. We are so used to expecting a crusading banner fluttering in the wind that we don’t notice the slight rustle of a monk’s cowl“. In the French press there is much soul-searching about the fires in hotels and apartment blocks especially inhabited by third world immigrants, after the last shocking case at Hay-les-Roses, in which 16 people died, caused by a thoughtless act of vandalism by three teenage girls. “ The criminal origin of the fires writes Dominique Quinio in La Croix of 6/9 does not dispense the authorities from interrogating themselves about their own responsibilities, even if the solutions are more complex that certain defenders of the disadvantaged imply“. Quinio lists a series of shortcomings, including “ the number of available apartments, which is insufficient, and the fact that some municipal authorities do not respect the quota of 20% of council housing prescribed by the law“. To all this is added “ the desperate situation of asylum seekers present in France for over a month, who do not have the right to work. When a negative reply arrives, these men and women, often parents of French children, disappear underground, and are reduced to occupying insalubrious and insecure apartments“. Even the “ spectacular evacuations of the poor, however motivated by questions of security, solve nothing, unless valid alternative accommodation is found”. “Over 75,000 million garments imported from China are blocked in European ports, hoping that a common position in negotiations with the Asian country is taken within the EU”: the news is the pretext for a wider reflection on the economic relations between China and the European Union in the editorial of the Spanish daily El Paìs of 5/9. According to the editorialist “this situation reflects a double incapacity of Europe: that of taking on board the consequences of free trade and that of the EU institutions in facilitating the solution of trade disputes like this”. The Spanish daily recalls that “the European Union is divided between the countries that form part of the protectionist bloc, headed by Italy, France and Spain, and those that don’t have a manufacturing industry that is threatened in this way and can therefore allow themselves the luxury of defending the right of consumers to benefit from the favourable prices offered by international competition”. In the view of the editorialist “the obdurate defence of inefficient sectors, or of firms incapable of surviving in a more competitive environment is not a good policy. In the first place because it prevents these firms from adopting decisions in favour of modernization and diversification”. In the second place , “because it is the consumer who ends up by paying”. And in the third place because “ extreme protectionist measures prevent the less developed countries from enjoying the necessary equality of opportunities”. ———————————————————————————————————– Sir Europa (English) N.ro assoluto : 1412 N.ro relativo : 61 Data pubblicazione : 09/09/05
