Was Pope Benedict XVI right about Catholic tolerance?

It is not for me, a non-Catholic, to say whether the late Pope, Benedict XVI,  served his Church well. But as a British (Anglican) Christian, I feel entitled to comment on any high-profile theologian, even him. For he had considerable influence beyond his Church, including emboldening neoconservative Anglicans in a stronger critique of liberal tradition.

In his reflections on how religion relates to politics he often claimed to draw on the best of modern thought, to offer a synthesis of faith and reason. A year into the job he gave a famous speech in Regensburg, in which he dared to compare the political visions of Islam and Christianity. 

He quoted a medieval Byzantine emperor addressing a Muslim: ‘Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.’ Though Benedict subsequently distanced himself from this statement, he endorsed the emperor’s argument that Christianity is committed to winning converts by peaceful means, using a form of rationality.

He was of course criticised for offending Muslims. But he should also have been criticised for hypocrisy – for hasn’t the Catholic Church been involved in authoritarianism? Has it really repented of its theocratic assumptions? Maybe some atheists said such things, but very few liberal Christians did. Imagine if the archbishop of Canterbury (Rowan Williams at the time) had responded by accusing both Muslims and Catholics of failing to appreciate the tradition of the liberal state. Because Benedict’s conservatism was seldom challenged by other Christians, he managed to make Catholicism seem the natural ally of toleration.

This is also apparent from his address to both Houses of Parliament, when he visited this country in 2010. He began by praising ‘Saint Thomas More, the great English scholar and statesman, who is admired by believers and non-believers alike for the integrity with which he followed his conscience, even at the cost of displeasing the sovereign whose “good servant” he was, because he chose to serve God first.’ 

But does admiration for More really extend beyond Catholics? He was a zealous persecutor of Protestants; he died in defence of the old medieval idea of theocracy.

Benedict went on to praise Britain ‘as a pluralist democracy which places great value on freedom of speech, freedom of political affiliation and respect for the rule of law, with a strong sense of the individual’s rights and duties, and of the equality of all citizens before the law. While couched in different language, Catholic social teaching has much in common with this approach, in its overriding concern to safeguard the unique dignity of every human person, created in the image and likeness of God, and in its emphasis on the duty of civil authority to foster the common good.’ 

This is misleading: Britain’s political liberalism was achieved by excluding Catholicism, and Catholicism only started claiming to affirm pluralism in the 1960s.

He then implied that Catholicism has become the more tolerant tradition. ‘I cannot but voice my concern at the increasing marginalisation of religion, particularly of Christianity, that is taking place in some quarters, even in nations which place a great emphasis on tolerance.’ True tolerance, it seems, means the state fully respecting the religions in its midst (we are not told if Islam is included in this). 

For a healthy public sphere, ‘religious bodies – including institutions linked to the Catholic Church – need to be free to act in accordance with their own principles and specific convictions based upon the faith and the official teaching of the Church. In this way, such basic rights as religious freedom, freedom of conscience and freedom of association are guaranteed.’

A few decades earlier, these claims would have been robustly dismissed in the British press. Our liberal tradition is a mix of Protestantism and secularism, it would have been said, and we don’t need advice on its maintenance from a traditionalist Pope. But by 2010 liberal Christians had almost entirely forgotten how to say such things.