Ratzinger styles himself Benedict XVI

As a lover of Vatican lore, nothing is better than election time in the Holy See of Rome. The tradition is rich with its white and black smoke, the conclave of cardinals and the anticipation of a new successor to Saint Peter.

Jesus supposedly elected one of his apostles, Simon, naming him Peter or the Rock of the new Church. Of course, since the church was not yet officially accepted, the early history is murky.

The name the pope takes is very special. It sets the tone for the papacy and sends a signal to the clergy. I like the early names. Linus came after Peter and then Cletus. The previous pope adopted John Paul after his predecessor, which was a name created from two popular names among popes, John and Paul. There were 23 Johns, all originating from the apostle and the writer of the gospel.

Benedict derives from Saint Benedict, the founder of the most hallowed order of monks in Catholicism. Benedict did not start monasticism but he did establish in the early 6th century the rules that almost all orders derive from. The Rule of Benedict is strict but not as strict as the later Cistercians. It is an order focused on discipline, learning and worship. While many trends have gained ascendancy at times, the Benedictines have remained the rock of the church, a solid tie to the past.

I imagine this pope will try to be this rock for the modern church. Strict, learned and worshipful. The previous pope Benedicts have had a sketchy past. Benedict XV was not too bad but his papacy was marred by war. The simoniacal Benedict IX was as bad as a pope could be.

The new pope is also a message sent by the cardinals who elected him. Benedict XVI is German. The church's relationship with the Germans has been an interesting one. At one time more than 10% of the German population was employed by the church. The German Emperors controlled the church during the early middle ages. The Germans were also the ones who eventually brought the Church to its knees in the 16th century with the Reformation. Not since the 11th century have we had a German pope. Perhaps this is an attempt to resurrect old ties.

We will see.

Lebanon: The Worst Story Ever Told

Behind the story of the drive toward freedom in Lebanon lies a history which exemplifies the broad struggle in the Middle East. It is a story of religious strife, of conflict between rich and poor, of sectarian hatred and, most of all, of the rise of Baathism.

In the mid 19th Century, the Ottoman Empire ostensibly controlled area that comprises Lebanon today, though the Europeans, especially the French, sent troops to the region. Most of the conflicts involved the Maronites versus the Druze, a semi-Muslim sect that does not identify with Muslims. The Maronites are Christian and they typically were wealthier than the Druze (and the Muslims for the that matter). As has been seen in history and has been reiterated in this blog, weakness corrupts the many. The Druze were mostly frustrated with their lack of advancement especially with the wealthier Maronites doing so well. Of course, it was easy to see that the Maronites did well because they focused on education and trade, often sending their children to European schools. Even today, the Christians of Lebanon are quite "cosmopolitan", as a recent visitor to the area told me. Their wealth really had little to do with being Christian but rather was a result of their liberal social structure. The Druze and their sometime Muslim allies were rigid in their ancient traditions.

When the Ottoman Empire fell apart, the French divided much of the area that includes Syria and Lebanon today. They gave the Al Biqa Valley to Lebanon because they thought it would improve defenses. However, with the Biqa Valley came a lot of poor Sunni Muslims. In the beginning, Christians were more than 50% of the population, accounted for most of the economic activity and thus dominated the region politically. Fear of the Sunni population explosion, caused the Lebanese government to adopt a very pro-Maronite/Christian constitution which assured Christian control of the young nation. This was most likely a mistake but did not contribute as much to the coming civil war as did the pathological Syrian jealousy. Syria felt as though Damascus was the proper center of government for a large expanse of land that included Lebanon, parts of Israel, parts of Turkey, Northern Iraq, and parts of Jordan. Ignorance being the cousin of poverty, Syria looked at the differernt fates of Damascus and Beirut and imagined that they somehow they had been cheated. Instead of exploring the roots of their weakness, they gave in to Fascism in the form of Ba'athism, a movement springing from the resentment of European influence.

Ba'athism, like it's sister Nazism, professed an adherence to Socialism and the dominance of a central ethnic identity. All over the Middle East, Arabs began lashing out at those who appeared stronger. Anyone different was a target. Today, Syria backs the Hizbollah faction, located in Al Biqa, which avowedly wants to establish a rigid fundamentalist Muslim regime in Lebanon. While one can't support the early Maronite attempt to "fix" power in Lebanon, they at least attempted to give a voice to all members.

The end result has been that Muslims in the mid 50s started attacking wealthy Maronite Arabs. This created a great diaspora of Lebanese to Europe and America. Many of these people have blended into American society but still retain their Lebanese names. Many of them have done very well for themselves as they brought with them the same ethic that made them successful (and a target) in Lebanon. A multimillionaire who now owns and develops land in Greensboro, NC, told me that he left with his family because they saw no end to the Muslim violence. As Muslims, through numbers and a willingness to resort to killing, grew in power, they began extorting money and land from non-Muslims. All this has meant more poverty and deeper despair for Muslims who can't see their own hand in their misery.

With the move for independence in Lebanon, I fear the ressurection of this old hatred. A hatred that will only intensify if the Maronites and other Christians (now 40% of the population) try to pay off the poorer Muslims with government programs. It is now, more than ever, that Muslims must reject pointless hatreds mired in a feeling of national shame.

More reading from the WSJ.

Berger Cops the Plea

After a little hiatus, Boldtalk is back.

Just recovering from a long bout with the flu, I almost fell into relapse when I read about Berger getting a slap on the wrist. This is a clear case of noblesse oblige, the right that politicians exercise to commit huge lapses in judgment. Neither party has an interest to do anything serious lest they set a precedent that bad behavior might actually receive serious punishment. For some, Sandy Berger was just "sloppy" or at worst was just trying to avoid embarrassment by destroying a critical memo. For me, that's what makes it so bad. That a former National Security Advisor would be willing to commit a felony just to cover his abysmal record. What he wanted to do was to be able to go around telling everyone how he and the Clinton Administration had done everything to go after Osama Bin Laden but he couldn't weave these lies with an accusatory document hanging around.

Would it have been so bad to just tell the truth? There were already plenty of other documents extant that told the true story. At a time when the country needed honesty, desperately, people like Berger think only of their own narrow interest. The truth is that Clinton's Administration did not go to any great lengths to get Osama. From my reading, I am convinced that Clinton himself wanted Osama dead but his advisors, Berger and Albright, were more concerned about taking too many chances and raising the ire of the Europeans, who repeatedly urged the US to deal with Osama by not mentioning his name. Berger could have told the 9/11 commission how he doubted they could have done much to get Osama with the Europeans so unwilling to help.

We might have even persuaded the 9/11 commission to look deeper into the role of Europe in the creation of terrorists. It's highly disturbing to me that we've hardly broached the subject with Europe that these terrorists that killed 3,000 of our citizens were not created in the Middle East but rather found their obscene calling in Europe, where anti-Americanism is rampant and where Arabs are made to feel like second class citizens.