ELITE. PRAY. GOV.

Despite the widely accepted belief that separation of church and state prohibits the association of religion and politics, Pope Benedict XVI’s work as a religiously inclined public intellectual yields that these two entities are equally necessary and collaborative components of life in the United States. The Pope, born Joseph Ratzinger, ascended from the relatively unconventional role of professor at a number of universities prior to assuming the duties of Jesus Christ’s Ambassador to Earth. Ratzinger earned various degrees before reaching professorship and has received Honoris Causa Degrees from around the globe since becoming Pope Benedict XVI. Before discussing the impact of this man’s work as a religious figurehead and public scholar, however, it must be made clear that there is a notable distinction between church, state, religion, and politics. Separation of church and state has taken on new meaning under political players that support a system in which religion and politics are entirely divorced. The First Amendment to the Constitution plainly stipulates that, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” and remains the only noteworthy reference to faith in official documents drafted by the founding fathers. However, many mistakenly interpret the doctrine separating church and state to mean that religion and politics cannot coexist on any level in contemporary America. This mythical severance of religious and political matters has manifested itself in the hearts and minds of a nation that has been left with little choice but to believe that concurrent discussion of these entities is prohibited from public discourse. Pope Benedict XVI tackles this issue head on by promoting a functional relationship between religion and politics in his writings and speeches, all the while stirring the idea that the two must coexist. His presence as a public intellectual is solidified by the ability to assume an imaginative and removed standpoint on matters of social significance despite the obligations of his religious post. Although critics may claim that the American doctrine separating church and state affairs renders the opinions of religiously inclined public leaders politically ineffectual within the borders of the United States, an exploration of Pope Benedict XVI illustrates that the two fields are not as distinctly separate as some citizens assume and yields that he is, indeed, a public intellectual of significant proportion.

Religion and politics are not as detached as is portrayed within the existing United States’ topical forum, and as Pope Benedict XVI asserts, the two should coexist in the public square today. The Pope authors widely dispersed encyclical letters that have become a progressive means of shaping the position of religion in the global sphere and determining how it should be incorporated with other entities. In 2005, Pope Benedict XVI conjectured in Deus Caritas Est, that, “politics and faith must meet,” and later related politics and religion by asserting that, “justice is both the aim and the intrinsic criterion of all politics [as it is in Catholicism].” These statements are of enormous interest given that the two bodies strive for the attention and devotion of the same citizens. The Pope even cites the growing political realm as a necessary and generally competing field of significance worldwide. It is clear that he has an enormous following and devotees of the Catholic faith abroad and in the U.S. would likely agree that politics and religion must remain functional components of one another given their common objectives. Despite the flawed tendency of America to be portrayed as a nation impervious to the movements and actions of the rest of the global community, (see fiscal crisis, War on Terror) Catholics make up 23.9% of the American population and would almost unanimously agree with the world views of his holiness. Although not a majority, any politician that relies on the votes of the electorate would be hard-pressed to insist that this quarter of the population is not significant. As a result, it is clear that religion and politics have a complex relationship and one would struggle to logically separate the two as entirely disconnected entities.

The presence of historically pertinent political precedent supplements Pope Benedict XVI’s claims that religion and politics must share the national stage due to the existence of an intricate and necessary relationship between the two. Despite the relative lack of religious allusions in official governmental documentation, faith’s place in communal dialogue of a political nature remains a challenged and debated issue. I concede that I do not believe that any political action, military or legislative, can possibly be justified by religious decrees or biblical lessons. Diplomatic moves must be rationalized by verifiable and supportable fact, as I am not arguing that religion and politics should coexist on the level that faith becomes a building block of decisions in Washington. However, it is difficult to ignore the fact that religion is built upon components of politics, just as politics involve facets of religious structure. For example, the election process employed by the College of Cardinals to elect a new Pope began in the thirteenth century and closely mirrored the format of the democratic electoral processes existing during that period. To some extent, the method of electing the Pope must have been adopted from the political balloting system that was in place at a time well before the idea of such a religious figure became a thought. No matter how logically wrong, it is also quite evident that some U.S. Presidents have made reference to religiously themed narratives and the words of the Pope when providing justification for legislation limiting stem cell research, abortions, and other political issues that fall under the realm of religious topics (see George W. Bush). The Pope’s encyclicals address such moral issues that have inherently become political topics like condom use and homosexuality, leaving little debate as to whether or not politics and religion share common ground. The government has acted upon these consistently religious subject matters by employing mandatory sexual education that stresses condom use in publicly funded schools and establishing the legality of homosexuality in some states via propositional voting. Most specifically, the recent invalidation of Proposition 8 by a California Judge and the subsequent appeals by the bill’s proponents illustrate the very political nature that some of Benedict XVI’s statements and issues have taken on. The Pope further connected religion and politics in a 2009 speech by proclaiming that, “It is often [the] ideological manipulation of religion for political ends that is the real catalyst for tension and division and at times, even violence in society.” Although Benedict XVI does not relate these topics on positive terms, he does equate them based on perhaps the most damaging yet recurrent collision of human interaction today– violence. The combination of the Pope’s faith-based writings and the presence of governmental and religious complexities ultimately place religion and politics in a transposable manner that yields a strong connection between the two within the United States.

Pope Benedict XVI’s capacity to navigate the duties of office and the public dialogue surrounding this religious post have led to his classification as one of the top public intellectuals of his time. Although the Pope is not the first religious figure to take political positions and address government affairs publicly, he may be the most in tune with such. As referenced previously, Benedict XVI denounces condom use and condemns homosexuality as a lifestyle choice. However, the head of the Catholic Church also discusses contemporary political issues that include nuclear disarmament, refugees, and the global economy. By stepping outside the traditional realm of papal duties and encouraging the need for these political issues and religious morality to coexist, perhaps Benedict XVI has eclipsed the final step in solidifying his position not only as head of the Catholic Church, but also in establishing his firm standing as a public scholar. The public intellectual is highlighted in this blog post and defined by such as one who serves the, “primary function of critic [and] uncovers views that become relevant to political [and social/cultural] decisions.” Furthermore, fellow public academic Alan Lightman posits in this article that the highest level public intellectual is seen as one who has, “become a symbol that stands for their discipline,” a feat that his holiness has achieved in conjunction with his feature in a variety of periodicals and publications citing the top 100 public intellectuals. Pope Benedict XVI’s views on politically troubling issues and ability to take an “aerial view of his particular field, despite enormous pressure to behave contrarily, render Benedict XVI a public intellectual for all intents and purposes. While it is hard to ignore the fact that academics of a religious nature have declined significantly in number and in the dominance of opinions in the modern day and age, Benedict XVI is proof that intellectuals of this school of thought still have a prominent and influential voice in the public forum.

The Pope embodies the public intellectual in a variety of different manners despite his affiliation with religion; a field that some would argue does not involve true intellectualism, but rather, the simple recollection of religious history and faith-based scriptures. However, these claims are dispelled by the simple fact that he is one of the most formally educated to ascend to the post and that he publicly comments on worldly issues that fall outside the traditional realm of the Catholic Church. He labels himself a critic by denigrating the scientifically supported claims by groups that encourage condom use as a form of birth control or as a device to prevent contraction of sexually transmitted diseases. Opponents challenge this position as unequivocally brainless and obtuse to modern research and data. No matter how contrary to present evidence and logical fact that this position is, the Pope must uphold the staunch views of Catholicism regardless of how compelled he might be as a highly educated individual. These decisions are generally based on the moral code and traditional view of the position he holds and should not serve the claim that Benedict XVI is unintelligent and thus, not a public intellectual. This contention and the often limiting effects of a position in the church are negated, however, by similar restrictions imposed upon public intellectuals that assume political office or any other post with municipal accountability. Regardless of the restraining characteristics of these positions of public influence, there is little doubt that Pope Benedict XVI embodies the role of public intellectual while balancing the obligations of this extremely public office.

Despite the decline in the supremacy of religious intellectualism in the domestic arena, this does not mean that there is no position for such scholars in the United States. Before reading the encyclicals and speeches of Pope Benedict XVI, I did not previously think that religion had a place in politics. One must take into account, however, that only 16.1% of the United States population identify themselves as religiously agnostic, thus, revealing that more than 80% of the nation likely identifies with the moral values and ethical makeup of their preferred religion. Expectantly, the words of Pope Benedict XVI affect the development of the Catholic congregation’s moral compass and make it known that religious discussion is much more closely related to politics than its detractors would like to admit. Upon assuming the role of Jesus Christ’s Ambassador to Earth, it is understandable that some of the freethinking and creative perspective that promotes truly original thinking would be clouded by the obligations of office. Therefore, it is reasonably difficult for the Pope to be entirely reflective and devoted to the aerial perspective that modern public intellectuals advocate. Nonetheless, he has managed to maintain an active hand in both the realm of academia and of religion in an admirable way, and should be recognized for his contributions to the vocation of public intellectuals and for his attempt to bridge the gap between politics and the Catholic Church in a truly original manner. This is not to say that political decisions must refer to religious scriptures or that elected officials must pray for the answer to the next political conundrum. On that note, I am not calling for the elimination of America’s secular nature and do not believe that any discussion regarding moral, political, or societal issues should be grounded in religious narratives or biblical verses. However, there is no denying the existence of an inherent relationship between religion and politics in America that is greater than the mythical separation of church and state such would lead to believe. Besides, what could be more American than Pope Benedict XVI sporting a baseball cap?