While on the subject of interesting observations… my husband and I were having dinner with our dinner club friends – some of whom are not Catholic – when it was mentioned that the Pope did not attend the State Dinner when he was in Washington. Does anyone know why? Isn’t that kind of limpolite when the President whent thru all the trouble of arranging a suitable dinner, etc? Just curious.
John Allen of the National Catholic Reporter addressed this in a column called
Rumor Control.
- The Pope is “snubbing” President Bush by not attending a White House dinner in his honor.
In fact, the pope virtually never attends gala events organized in his honor by other parties, especially while he’s on the road. Basically speaking, when the pope travels he commits to following his official agenda, no more and no less.
This time around, for example, it’s not just the White House that’s throwing a party for the pope without the guest of honor. The Italian Embassy to the United States is also hosting a birthday bash organized by former and current U.S. ambassadors to the Holy See. Once again, the Holy Father is not expected to attend.
Rumors, therefore, that Benedict XVI has “spurned” an invitation from Bush on the basis of some specific policy difference – out of protest over the Iraq war, for example, or debates over the use of “torture” – seriously over-interpret this standard bit of papal operating procedure.
Of course, Benedict XVI is committed to staying above the American political fray, and that might provide an additional incentive to steer clear of events that could be interpreted as having a political overtone.
Nonetheless, the bottom line on the White House bash is that
if you’re going to a party with the pope, it’s almost always going to be on his turf and at his invitation.