I just heard there's a new pope, but no word yet about the details. Nothing on Drudge.

UPDATE: Drudge now has his siren up. No white smoke yet.

UPDATE: They just announced that Josef Cardinal Ratzinger was selected, and he has chosen as his papal name Benedict XVI.

MORE (1:00 p.m): Last week I had another post titled "Habemus Papam!" -- currently the subject of much traffic. That was satire; this is real! (Odd that I'd feature an earlier Pope Benedict (XIII); hope I don't have the gift of prophecy.)

AND MORE: Andrew Sullivan is clearly unhappy with the new pope, who yesterday as Ratzinger condemned what he called a "dictatorship of relativism":

Having a clear faith, based on the Creed of the Church, is often labeled today as a fundamentalism. Whereas, relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and 'swept along by every wind of teaching', looks like the only attitude (acceptable) to today's standards. We are moving towards a dictatorship of relativism which does not recognize anything as for certain and which has as its highest goal one's own ego and one's own desires. (Via Glenn Reynolds.)

Perhaps the new pope will recognize that the existence of right and wrong does not always mean that in every argument, one side is absolutely right and the other absolutely wrong. I guess we'll see. I do hope Pope Benedict doesn't turn out to be the "Grand Inquisitor" Sullivan seems to be anticipating.

Considering that I believe in right and wrong, I hardly qualify as a relativist, but I nonetheless think relativism is healthier than Inquisitions. (The devil is always in the definitions.....)

MORE: It is one thing to discuss relativism in the context of the Inquisition. More recently, the debate within the Catholic Church has focused on relativism vis a vis Islam:

John Paul II's charisma was such that few dared challenge his strategy. Now that he is no longer there, however, his strategy will be subjected to scrutiny within the Catholic Church.

One critic is Cardinal Josef Ratzinger, a leading candidate for papacy. Ratzinger believes that John Paul II's strategy of alliance with Islam has put the Vatican not on the side of the Muslim peoples but on the side of despotic regimes that dominate the Muslim world. Ratzinger sees relations between Islam and Catholicism as one of competition over the truth.

Ratzinger suggests an alternative strategy under which the Catholic Church would focus on the consolidation of its position in its traditional strongholds in Europe and the American Continent. In that context Ratzinger has publicly opposed the admission of Turkey into the European Union.

Ratzinger regards a formal dialogue with Islam as a handicap for the Catholic Church because it would assume a measure of equality between the two faiths, signaling to people, especially in Europe, that they can shop around for religion. Ratzinger's strategy enjoys much support in the College of Cardinals. But it also has critics.

Cardinal Angel Scola, the archbishop of Venice and another contender for John Paul II's succession, regards Ratzinger's strategy as "defensive" and based on the West's traditional fears about Islam. Cardinal Cormac Murphy O'Connor, the archbishop of Westminster, goes further and described dialogue with Islam as "an urgent need".

"We must find interlocutors in all Muslim countries," he says. "Christianity and Islam have a shared responsibility in defending world peace."

Both Scola and O'Connor believe that John Paul II's public opposition to the war in Iraq helped prevent a "clash of civilizations".

An even more ardent advocate of dialogue with Islam is Cardinal Francis Arinze, also a leading candidate for John Paul II's succession. A Nigerian, Arinze has direct experience of Islam because more than half of his native country's population is Muslim.

At a meeting in Rabat, Morocco, several years ago, Arinze told us that he believed Christians had much to learn from "the sincere ardor of Muslims" while Muslims could benefit from the West's openness to new scientific and political ideas.

Like John Paul II, Arinze believes both Islam and Christianity need a united "anti-secularism" front to protect further erosion in their faith.

"Many Christians are uncomfortable with the idea of faith having its say on all issues," he said. "In Islam, however, religion is still regarded as a legitimate participant in the public debate. We must work together to make this case in the global arena."

In the next few days we shall know who has won the argument in the Vatican.

And I'll say something I've said before:

the fact remains, no matter how they have tried to spin it over the centuries, "Christian war" will always have an oxymoronic ring to it. "Islamic war," on the other hand, goes by the name "Jihad."