So, the pope resigned, which I – and I suspect many Catholics – didn’t realize he could do. Apparently there is an ‘ejector-seat’ clause in divine appointments which everyone forgot about, including past popes. That’s why they usually gradually disappear into their robes, getting more and more incoherent, until one day someone gives the robes a poke and a cloud of dust puffs out.
The last time a pope resigned was in 1415. Before this time there were – not one, not two, but three popes spread out across Europe. Lacking modern communication methods their respective followers were able to ignore each other, until they couldn’t. When they couldn’t they argued, and in those days arguments took the form of killing the person who doesn’t agree with your views. This was known as The Great Western Schism, and was probably the greatest of the Western Schisms to have happened until Beatlemania. Also, as you can imagine, with so many popes claiming to be more popey than the other guy it was hard to get anything done. Finally, after 40 years of schism, Pope Gregory XII and Pope John XXIII grudgingly resigned, while Pope Benedict XIII was excommunicated and Pope Martin V was made official, and everyone could get back to the business of burning witches.
Since then, zero resignations until now — when Pope Benedict XVI announced he’ll step down of his own free will. He cited declining health and a weakened spiritual and mental vigour. A fairly selfless claim considering that most popes before him claimed spiritual vigour long after their mental vigour had left the building.
His resignation triggered a collective spiritual gasp amongst Catholics on February 11th. Then, when extra drama was definitely needed, lightning struck the dome on St. Peter’s Basilica about six hours later. For Catholics this was significant, although nobody could agree why. For atheists this was aggravating, and for everyone else it was ‘fairly interesting’ because that’s what lightning rods are for. For the media, this was a miracle, and duly inspired they managed to trump the Catholics in terms of attributing significance to the lightning. They also couldn’t agree on why, but had more fun doing it.
The day after, no doubt gripped by religious fervour, the New York Post began speaking in tongues: “Pope: I’m Outta Here Sparking His wrath”, they declared. USA Today managed to keep it together, “Lightning strikes the Vatican – literally”, while The Sun convulsed in a divine seizure: “RATZ ALL FOLKS!; POPE QUITS SHOCK…”
The lightning also had the worldwide press scrambling for clichés they could associate with electricity. They came up with two: ‘Bolt out of the blue’ and ‘Shockwave around the world’. Everyone from the New York Times and the Irish Daily Mail, to Der Spiegel and Shanghai Daily used the phrase “A bolt out of the blue” while the phrase “Shockwave around the world” was enthusiastically flogged like Jesus during The Passion by about 16 top tier news sources including the ABC and the BBC. The Israeli Haaretz, showing an incredible lack of hipness, used “Shockwave around the world” in an article that had nothing to do with Rome, the Vatican, or anything vaguely pope-like.
Naturally, most of these “shock”, “bolt”, “zap”, “spark”, or “jolt” articles didn’t bother to ask how often the Basilica gets hit by lightning, or even mention that it’s the tallest building in the vicinity. Yahoo News did give it a shot with this question: “Was the lightning strike, coming just hours after Pope Benedict’s announcement, evidence of God’s wrath, or some ominous sign from above?”
Yahoo didn’t keep us in suspense, the hard-hitting answer came quickly: “Perhaps, but it was more likely the natural result of a rainstorm that was passing over Rome at the time.” The article continues with the fact that most religious symbols are metal, and high-up, and therefore prone to lightning. Keep in mind, somebody got paid to write this.
The media has since gotten over the lightning and has now moved on to pope selection.
Unfortunately, for them, the mechanics of choosing a pope is a very closely guarded secret. What is generally known is that the Cardinals are summoned to the Vatican, they lock themselves in a room, try to convince each other why their pope choice is the best, leave the room, and over the course of two days drop ballots into a chalice. After this, the ballots are tallied and the guy with the most votes gets to be pope. It’s unclear where the secret is in all of this, but as the BBC – while providing in-depth, step-by-step analysis of the procedure – assures us, it is a highly “secret process”. Everyone else will recognize it as democracy in action, complete with closed-door wheeling and dealing preceding a public announcement about what the elite are going to do whether you like it or not.
Either way, you can expect that kind of context and depth from the BBC. Not like its cross-eyed younger cousin, the Daily Mail, who literally published the betting odds on which cardinal will become pope. The spread was sourced from paddypower.com, a massive UK bookie agency. They gave 3 to 1 odds on: “Cardinal Marc Ouellet, 68. Country: Canada. Elevated to the cardinalate by Pope John Paul II. Significant Views: Belief that abortion is unjustifiable, even in cases of rape.”
The list of candidates goes down the page in this fashion — with stats beside a smiling picture of the potential pope. It looks like a bizarre union between an online-dating site and an off-track betting pamphlet:
20/1 Cardinal Christoph von Schonborn, 68
Country: Austria
Got elevated in ‘62
Likes reading and cycling. Favourite show: Dexter.
12/1 Cardinal Angelo Bagnasco
Country: Italy
Favourite food: pasta.
Favourite sport: Two-man luge
“Nobody blesses a holy sacrament like The Mighty Bagnasco”
The Mail, showing rare restraint, chose to leave out the odds paddypower gave Bono or noted atheist Richard Dawkins’ winning the papacy (1000/1 and 666/1 respectively). ABC News got in on the action as well, but showed a higher journalistic standard by including Bono in their article as well as the odds from the UK’s other massive bookie agency: Ladbrokes.
Clearly this kind of coverage is ridiculous. Turning the highest, most solemn level of the Catholic church into an X-Factor side-show seems unfair, but as Reuters pointed out: “Pope Benedict’s decision to live in the Vatican after he resigns will … offer legal protection from any attempt to prosecute him in connection with sexual abuse cases around the world, Church sources and legal experts say.” And that is unfair.
But it may explain the lightning.
arindehoog 