Analysis:Cardinals for Iraq and Armagh seems political, as does the First World bias, writes Paddy Agnew.
The "elevation" of new men to the College of Cardinals always prompts the same basic questions. Are we looking at "significant" appointments that may say much about the doctrinal and political direction of the pontificate, or are we merely looking at "routine" appointments to one of the world's most exclusive, all-male clubs, appointments that follow an in-house, civil-service-style logic that rewards loyalty, reliability and age as much as genuine achievement?
In relation to this second consistory of Pope Benedict XVI's pontificate, the answer is nothing new. Quite clearly, we are looking at a bit of both - important appointments on the one hand and career rewards on the other. 'Twas ever thus.
Popes do not usually offer explanations for the rationale behind the appointment of a particular cardinal. Yet, last Saturday in the basilica of St Peter's during the consistory that saw the "creation" of 23 new cardinals, Pope Benedict spelt it out loud and clear, at least with regard to one appointment.
Speaking of the 80-year-old Iraqi, Emmanuel III Dely, patriarch of Babylon (Baghdad) of the Chaldeans, the Pope was especially forthcoming: ". . . in this moment of joy, how can we not look with affection and apprehension at our dear Christian community in Iraq?
"Our dear brothers and sisters in the faith are suffering in their own flesh the dramatic consequences of a continuing conflict and today they are living in a very fragile and delicate political situation. By calling the Patriarch of the Chaldean church to the College of Cardinals, I wanted to express, in a very concrete way, my spiritual solidarity and my affection for those peoples . . ."
Lest anyone missed the point, the Pope paused in his homily just as soon as he had named the magic buzz word, "Iraq", prompting a sustained round of applause.
Benedict may well be viewed as much less "God's politician" than his immediate predecessor, John Paul II, yet this was an occasion when he chose to make a very blunt political point.
In the ongoing horror and human misery prompted by the misguided US-led invasion of Iraq, Benedict is worried about the fate of Iraqi Christians. 20 years ago, there were 1.4 million Christians in Iraq. Yet today that number may have been halved, given the wholescale exodus of Christians.
A recent violent reminder of the pressures facing Iraqi Christians came just last June when 34-year-old Fr Rajheed Ganni, a Chaldean priest who for seven years had studied at the Irish College in Rome, was shot and killed, along with three deacons, in the northern Iraq town of Mosur, just after all four had celebrated Mass.
With the appointment of Patriarch Emmanuel, the Pope was saying to Chaldean (and to Middle Eastern) Christians that in the face of political instability, economic meltdown and the rise of Islamic fundamentalism, the Catholic Church is with you.
The appointment of our own Seán Brady can be seen in a similar, if fortunately less violent and dramatic, light.
While it is true that Cardinal Brady has waited for his "red hat" since 1996 when he was nominated Archbishop of Armagh, it is also true that Benedict views the Northern Irish peace process very positively, arguing that it offers the positive example of "Christians working out their problems in a very reconciliatory way". In that context, he sees Cardinal Brady as someone who has made a very positive contribution both to the peace process and to ecumenical relations with the Protestant churches.
If those are two appointments that seem merited and justified, the same considerations might not necessarily spring to mind when looking at the other appointments made last weekend.
For example, no fewer than seven senior Vatican curia figures were made cardinals, while of the 18 "elector cardinals" (under the age of 80), 11 are European, three North American, two African and only one each comes from Asia and Latin America.
In other words of the new "electors", only four (or 22 per cent) come from the developing world. The predominance of curia and European appointments is, of course, linked to Church tradition and the need to fill "seats" that have always had a cardinal.
Furthermore, Pope Benedict makes no secret of his view that Europe is the spiritual "epicentre" of the Church.
Yet that same European and North American predominance seems at odds with one of the fundamental realities of today's Catholic Church.
If two-thirds of Catholics today live in the developing world, how come (approximately) two-thirds of the cardinals come from the first world?
Seemingly in response to just that criticism, Secretary of State Cardinal Taricisio Bertone last week claimed that the make-up of the College of Cardinals is proportionate to the distribution of priests and bishops in the world.
While that claim seems highly debatable, there is no denying Cardinal Bertone's logic when he says that the Pope "is free in a sovereign sense" when he names cardinals, adding: ". . . the College of Cardinals is not, and cannot be, a mere assembly in which the various local churches are represented using democratic methods".
In other words, this "club" was, is and will remain very exclusive.