Ad Limina

I watched with some interest Pope Benedict's recent visit to the United Kingdom. And with some mystification as well. Just why did it have to be a state visit? While it is true that Vatican City and its outlying territories (the Lateran Basilica and its palace, the summer residence at Castel Gandolfo, etc) you could hardly say that the papal state is in any real sense a people or a nation, anymore than the similarly sovereign Knights of Malta are, who also have patch of Rome on which to raise a flag.

However, beyond the cost to the British taxpayer of His Holiness' ad limina visit to The Protestant Island, there was a detail which I found rather more important. Apart from praising (and indeed beatifying) Cardinal Newman for a miracle he probably didn't perform, and for views which he apparently didn't hold, the Holy Father's tone was generally very negative.

Now, there are lots of things to be negative about, and the pope has been duly negative about most of them. But is that enough? Can you lead people to Christ without showing them why it would be a good, joyful, and life-affirming thing that they should be so led? I rather doubt it.

If I remember rightly, St Francis de Sales had something to say about a spoonful of honey being rather more attractive than a barrelful of vinegar. But what is it that is attractive about Christ - and how can it be effectively conveyed to our contemporaries?