To Pontificate Without A Point

It is seldom that I purchase the daily newspaper simply because I can read most of the news from the internet news sites. This afternoon however, it was an exception. I purchased the New Straits Times daily because I was waiting for my lunch to be served.

On page 33 of its “World” section dated July 12, 2010, the News Straits Times had this caption printed in larger bold type face:

Pope ‘snubs’ Prince Charles

and I quote in full, the rest of what was reported:

LONDON: Pope Benedict has turned down the chance to meet Prince Charles on his first state visit to Britain, claiming he is “too busy”.

The two men will not get together even though Charles will be in Scotland when the pontiff starts his three-day trip by calling on the Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip at Holyrood House in Edinburgh.

Charles had wanted to meet the pope separately in Endinburgh on the same day but at another venue.

Yesterday, there were claims that Charles has demanded his own meeting to establish his independence from the queen, and was disappointed the pope had declined.

Now Charles will remain at Birkhall, the house he shares with Camilla on the Balmoral estate, while his parents make a trip from the royal family’s summer retreat to meet the pope at Holyrood on Sept 16.

The prince’s spokesman denied he had been snubbed. “There were discussions between the Vatican and Clarence House about the possibility of having a separate meeting while the pope was in Edinburgh but there wasn’t time in his schedule for that.”

The spokesman also denied that the prince has rejected a subsequent invitation by the pope to join him at an inter-faith eveen in London the following day.

The Mail on Sunday has been told that the pope offered it as an alternative to a one-to-one meeting with Prince Charles and that the prince rejected it on the grounds that it did not match his status.

The prince’s spokesman said that he had not been invited to the inter-faith event.

Charles takes his Anglican faith seriously and while there is much on which he and Benedict will agree, there are also potential areas of friction. Bearing in mind that the church opposition to divorcees remarrying, the prince’s marital history would also not be regarded as ideal by the Vatican. – DM

I dare say that protocol and the advisors to both sides, the Pontiff and Prince Charles, have one thing in common – the ability to stir a storm in a teacup.

May I ask, what would Jesus of Nazareth have done if he were in the Pontiff’s position? Jesus of Nazareth who met and moved around without protocol. Jesus of Nazareth whose greatest ostentation was when he rode on a donkey into Jerusalem. Jesus of Nazareth who stood before Pontius Pilate, the Roman Governor, not on a state visit but to be arraigned before he was handed over to his detractors to be crucified.

Here is a man who bears the title of being the shepherd of the Catholics. One who is supposedly to be walking in the footsteps of Jesus of Nazareth. Here he is, allowing to be embroiled in matters that are not in the interest of Faith. Wherein lies the openness to dialogue that the Vatican has always been proudly declaring?

Ironically, I have been in the same kind of position like it is described about the pontiff in that news article. On several occasions, I was only able to meet and discuss with very important Executives who like the Pontiff never had time with their busy schedule.

We met at the Gents Comfort Room and held short discussion while we both were having our pee.

The pontiff ought to consider that (the Gents Comfort Room – true to its own name) as the last solution to meet Prince Charles.