By Matt Bisanz

I was lucky enough to have been in my room when Pope Benedict XVI’s election was announced on television. I watched with the same eagerness as the white smoke billowed out the chimney and listened to the commentators try to fill the 15 minute void between the smoke and his appearance.

Two things in particular struck a chord within me. The first was the media’s concern with being the first to have the story. The reporter I was listening to actually was complaining that because a cardinal’s name is in the format First Name, Cardinal, Last Name, that there would be a two second delay between the first name and the last name. In the whole scheme of a multi-billion year old universe, how important is a two second delay? How rabid is our desire of information that we must constantly be bombarded by input? I admit I have a cell phone, but with the proliferation of iPods and other electronic devices, when does a person have time for the slow methodical analysis of a problem? But that is beside the point because no one would ever give up his ipod to think more, so I will just move on to my next point.

The second point is that this papal election brought out Americans’ self-importance complex. I could barely watch the news after Benedict’s election without hearing some commentator say what he thought Benedict should do or hearing some activist say that the new pope had to do x, y, or z to be a good pope. We are used to a democracy where we just keep voting in leaders who will do what we want, not what is best for us. An example is that of lax fuel efficiency standards. We want big SUVs even though fuel efficiency is a more important long-term concern.

In that same vein, Pope Benedict XVI cannot concern himself with making immediate changes to do what people want today. He must concern himself with the long-term plans of the Catholic faith. These include addressing current issues, but sometimes periods of time must separate the occurrence of the issue and the remedy in order to allow a reasoned, impartial analysis of the issue.

Secondly, Pope Benedict XVI is responsible to no one. His papacy is already a success regardless of what people may think. In his role of supreme pontiff he is free from error in issues of doctrine and morals, so there is no way he can fail in that duty.

As to being as personable or popular as John Paul II, while that may be important it cannot be the overriding factor of Benedict’s papacy. Often unnoticed in John Paul’s papacy was his 1983 revision of canon law or his 1995 document summarizing and detailing papal elections. As much as he was the pilgrim pope, John Paul was also a prolific writer. Benedict may not be as personable, but in the long-term the effects of a papacy are in its writing, not its personability. Pius IX was not a popular pope in any sense of the word, but his definition of moral responsibility has stood to this day. Paul VI was also unpopular, but his definition of morals is still the rule today.

In summary Benedict’s heritage as a pope is based on what he does in his office as pope, not how many million people he can persuade to like him.