Posted for Alison Abbott
On Tuesday the Vatican announced that, following a spate of protests that had escalated into a political firestorm, the Pope would not be addressing the University of Rome La Sapienza at the inauguration of its academic year. The story has had a fair amount of international pick up (BBC, New York Times) and yesterday riot police watched as students marched through Rome demanding ‘Freedom for the University’ (Reuters).
The Italian press is nearly unanimous in saying that the physisicts who called for the invitation to the Pope to be withdrawn and the few dozen students protesting against the visit in student-y ways were wrong. Academic opposition was an unacceptable assault on freedom of expression, and Ratzi’s (as he is known) voluntary withdrawal from the event was regrettable (eg L’Unita)
Prime minister Romano Prodi said the actions ‘provoked an unacceptable tension and a climate which dishonours the traditions of civilisation and tolerance of Italy’, and key politicians lost no time in joining in with similar statements. Research minister Fabio Mussi, told parliament that it was a big mistake for the mission of the university which is “a place to receive, not to reject; it’s not necessary to agree with the Pope, but to respect his right to speak..” (See Corriere Della Sera.)
Luciano Maiani, who has just been named as next president of the CNR, Italy’s national research council (see Nature – subscription required), was one of the 67 professors to sign the letter calling for the Pope’s invitation to be retracted. What exactly happened behind the scenes when this was noted we may never know – but Maiani quickly retracted his own opposition.
The nearest thing you’ll find to criticism comes from reading between the lines of La Stampa’s story, Why did the Pope say ‘no’?
For most Italian scientists, astounded that such a small number of protestors could have unleashed such a response, the question is more: “Why on Earth did the rector of La Sapianza invite the pope to speak at the university in the first place?”
In Germany – where interest is particularly high since Ratzi is a Bavarian – Deutsche Welle was a little more direct in its questioning of the decision. “It is still unclear exactly why the Vatican withdrew from the event. Benedict XVI, just like John Paul II, had never previously interrupted his travel plans because of criticism or threats from those he is visiting.”
According to experts, it went on, “security would have been manageable because there would have been sufficient police presence”.
The protestors’ main concern was the perceived threat to the separation of state and church, which is taken very seriously in Italy. But the professors’ letter also made reference to a 1990 speech made by Ratzi in Parma – when he was still Cardinal Josef Ratzinger – that quoted the view of Austrian philosopher Paul Feyerabend that the church’s condemnation of Galileo was ‘rational’ when viewed in historical context.
The Vatican denied that Ratzi endorsed the view that he quoted. As pope, Ratzi similarly upset the world in a speech during his ‘home’ visit to Bavaria in 2006 by quoting a 14th view by a Byzantine emperor that Islam tends towards violence.
All this said, our esteemed columnist Phil Ball liked his recent encyclical on technological change.