Manichäischer Journalismus

In einem früheren Posting ließ ich ja leichte Vorbehalte gegenüber John L. Allens Ratzingerbiographie anklingen. Damit befinde ich mich in guter Gesellschaft: in der des Autors selber.

Der nämlich zitiert in seinem "Word from Rome"(26. April 2005) aus einem eigenen Vortrag von 2004:

"My 'conversion' to dialogue originated in a sort of 'bottoming out.' It came with the publication of my biography of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, issued by Continuum in 2000 and titled The Vatican's Enforcer of the Faith. The first major review appeared in Commonweal, authored by another of my distinguished predecessors in this lecture series, Fr. Joseph Komonchak. It was not, let me be candid, a positive review. Fr. Komonchak pointed out a number of shortcomings and a few errors, but the line that truly stung came when he accused me of "Manichean journalism." He meant that I was locked in a dualistic mentality in which Ratzinger was consistently wrong and his critics consistently right. I was initially crushed, then furious. I re-read the book with Fr. Komonchak's criticism in mind, however, and reached the sobering conclusion that he was correct. The book - which I modestly believe is not without its merits - is nevertheless too often written in a "good guys and bad guys" style that vilifies the cardinal. It took Fr. Komonchak pointing this out, publicly and bluntly, for me to ask myself, 'Is this the kind of journalist I want to be'? My answer was no, and I hope that in the years since I have come to appreciate more of those shades of gray that Fr. Komonchak rightly insists are always part of the story."

Allen hat anscheinend ein neues Buch über BXVI in Arbeit, und das ist dann auf dem aktuellen Stand seiner Selbst- und Fremderkenntnis. Da bin ich gespannt.