|
Elections: Sacred and ProfaneBy Joe Feuerherd
Pope Benedict XVI’s political skills are
clearly not the least of the new Holy Father’s many talents.
Joseph Napolitan, for one, is impressed. Napolitan, who
coined the phrase “political consultant” so he’d have a title in John Kennedy’s
1960 presidential bid, has run hundreds of campaigns. The baptized but
non-practicing Catholic noted striking similarities between the Sistine Chapel
balloting and the rough-and-tumble world of American politics.
First rule of secular campaigns: voters should know the
candidate. Voters’ familiarity with the prospective officeholder, says Napolitan,
“matters a tremendous amount.”
Next, says the founder of the American Association of
Political Consultants and the International Association of Political
Consultants, it helps to have a candidate who knows the voters, who has
experience dealing directly with their concerns and interests. That’s why
“constituent service” – the time a congressman’s staff spends tracking down lost
Social Security checks – is considered essential.
Third: seize the moment. Campaigns can be won or lost when
the spotlight shines brightest. Remember Nixon and Checkers? Reagan and “there
you go again.” Mondale and “Where’s the Beef?”
In the days following his election, Benedict XVI disavowed
ambition. In fact, he told German pilgrims April 25 that, as the conclave
balloting progressed and the reality of the task before him became clear, he
prayed he would not be selected. Yet, with the benefit of nine days hindsight,
it is difficult to see how he would have behaved differently – given the
constraints of custom and canon law -- had he actually wanted the job.
With more than two decades of service as prefect of the
Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, Ratzinger, says Napolitan, “was
ideally placed. He was one of the few cardinals who was in regular contact with
the other cardinals, which makes a big difference when there are 115 of them
scattered all over the world.”
Napolitan continued, “Like any other organization, there
are lots of people [in the church] who toil away and nobody has to go to them
for approval for anything, but Ratzinger was in a position of authority; which
is not to say that he had any ulterior motive – they [the cardinals] think he
did a good job and he made the most of it.”
Plus, Ratzinger knew the voters. In fact, as a key aide to
the man who selected nearly every conclave elector, Ratzinger knew them better
than most. “I guarantee I could win a lot more elections than I do if I could
help pick the electorate,” quips Napolitan.
Certainly, as Dean of the College of Cardinals, Ratzinger
was in a unique public position following the death of John Paul II. He gave the
well-received homily at the funeral mass, presided at the daily meetings of the
General Congregation of cardinals, and, on the day the conclave began, gave a
controversial sermon which spelled out a vision for the church.
It was not a Happy-Days-are-Here-Again approach.
"The small boat of thought of many Christians has often
been tossed about by these waves--thrown from one extreme to the other: from
Marxism to liberalism, even to libertinism; from collectivism to radical
individualism; from atheism to a vague religious mysticism; from agnosticism to
syncretism, and so forth,” said Ratzinger. “Every day new sects are created and
what Saint Paul says about human trickery comes true, with cunning which tries
to draw those into error (cf Eph 4, 14). Having a clear faith, based on the
Creed of the Church, is often labeled today as a fundamentalism. Whereas,
relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and ‘swept along by every wind of
teaching,’ looks like the only attitude [acceptable] to today's standards. We
are moving towards a dictatorship of relativism which does not recognize
anything as for certain and which has as its highest goal one's own ego and
one's own desires”
Tough stuff and, to some ears, the homily seemed off-key –
the type of rhetoric more likely to alienate than endear. Instead, as it turned
out, Ratzinger was demonstrating just the type of leadership a good number of
cardinals apparently craved.
“He was already acting like the pope,” says Napolitan.
“Can you say ‘mandate?” asked conservative pundit Hugh
Hewitt.
Elections are funny things. In voting for Ronald Reagan,
for example, Americans sought a strong leader who would combat communism, cut
taxes, and fight “big government.” By and large, they got what they wanted.
And then there was Lyndon Johnson’s (another Napolitan
client) 1964 landslide. Lost to history is the wag who first said: "They told me
if I voted for Goldwater we'd soon have half a million American troops in
Vietnam. So I voted for Goldwater, and they were right."
The conclave cardinals knew what they were buying in a
Ratzinger papacy. Or so they thought. In his early “honeymoon” days, Benedict
XVI has spoken of his desire to listen, has reached out to other religious
traditions, and generally put a kinder and gentler face on his German Shepherd
persona. Skillful public relations? Undoubtedly. But also, some hope, something
more.
I’m personally skeptical, disbelieving really, that a
78-year-old man with deeply held views about the church and its role in the
broader society will adopt a new tone because he has a new role. No, based on
that pre-conclave sermon and a long theological career, it’s evident to me that
Benedict XVI thinks he’s got a good take on the controversial questions of our
time. There’s every reason to believe that papal policies will reflect that
worldview.
On the other hand, he’s got some freedom to maneuver.
Unlike his secular political counterparts, he doesn’t have to face the voters
ever again.
The e-mail address for Joe Feuerherd is
jfeuerherd@natcath.org
|
