Gepetto_Zapata, on 18 September 2012 - 06:34 PM, said:
Thanks Servidor... Nice read, by the way when he speaks, is it in Italian or hardcore Latin?
You are most welcome. I was beginning to think no one was listening to me! It would be Italian. Latin is usually reserved for conversing with other priests, bishops or religious (depending on which; very useful if you cannot speak Italian or the bishop of Rome's native language) and for official documents. Nothing comes out of Rome except in Latin. A Jesuit I admired put it very well once: With the Latin, you cannot cheat.
Here is another article
from a good source that summarizes the visit well. The visit itself was actually occasioned by the release of a document from the Synod of bishops of the Middle East called Ecclesia in Medio Oriente. For those who could do nothing but read between the lines and speculated passionately about all the political motives he did not have, Magister's last lines seem to me to be perfect for it.
". . .Benedict XVI once again disappointed those who would like to see him make dazzling political gestures or bring solutions of international strategy.
But precisely by acting in this way, he has gone to the essence of what his mission requires.
For all, he recalled the grammar of the natural law. For Christians, the sign of the cross."
Here are all
of the addresses he gave available online in several languages (scroll down).
Calling Constantine to mind was a courageous move by Benedictvs. For those of us who actually know Constantine, it was a tilt of the head. While in the context of the region it was meant to recall that Constantine's lasting religious legacy was not his conversion (one man's conversion had no power to convert an empire) but the Milan Edict of Toleration of 313 Anno Domini, which was never revoked or abrogated and which did not make the Christian religion the State religion. It simply gave the Church room for maneuver. All religions were to be tolerated. The battle for the soul of the Roman empire began. We won.
And in case anyone feels inclined to bring it up - Constantine's later edicts against heresies were promulgated because the relevant groups violated other point's of State Law. In some cases he was just reiterating what his predecessor's had decided in their regard (so, Diocletian's edict against Manichaens).
Edited by Servidor, 19 September 2012 - 12:08 PM.