The Word from Rome
In December I had an opportunity to go to Rome. In spite of the raw weather, it was wonderful to revisit familiar places and see old friends, some from as long ago as 1970.
But a big reason for visiting this year has to do with the future. I was eager to see Pope Benedict XVI in action and get a sense of who he is and what he is doing. In his transition from Vatican II theological expert to Professor to Vatican bureaucrat he has re-invented himself in the past. Will that happen again? What will be the prospects for ecumenism during his papacy?
For those who would like a careful assessment of his role in recent years I suggest the article by Paul Elie entitled “The Year of two Popes” in the January – February 2006 Atlantic Monthly. From my own observations I’d say it is an insightful and helpful piece.
And I would add, from what I’ve seen, that there do not seem to be many clear expectations of what Papa Ratzinger (his name in Italian usage) is likely to do. He is well-known -- and unknown. As Paul Elie points out, he has been most powerfully affected by his previous academic and bureaucratic callings, whereas John Paul II, whom Benedict refers to as “Our Great Predecessor” (all caps -- “Insignis Decessor Noster”), was most powerfully affected by his country of origin. In spite of Benedict’s preference for the scholarly life he is very personable and focuses on each individual with warmth and real attention, with the love he speaks of in his recently available first Encyclical, “Deus Caritas Est” (“God Is Love”).
And that is another lens for looking at Benedict XVI. Some points I noticed from my first reading:
1. One concerns his style. A number of observers have called it “lucid.” His phrasing flows smoothly. Ever the teacher, he seems to have made his watchword “faith, hope, and clarity.” He makes use of modern Biblical scholarship. And he can turn a phrase. A couple of examples from the Encyclical: “God does not demand of us a feeling which we ourselves are incapable of producing.” “God’s passionate love for his people... is so great that it turns God against himself, his love against his justice.” “What we have [in much modern thinking]... is really an inhuman philosophy. People of the present are sacrificed to the molech of the future...”
2. Another observation concerns is his classical Euro-centrism. He talks about Julian the Apostate, Nietzsche, St. Martin of Tours. He quotes Virgil, Tertullian, Ignatius, Sallust, Pope Gregory the Great, Descartes, and a passage from St. Augustine’s City of God which is a particular favorite of mine (IV,4). (Unfortunately, some of these references do not seem to work so well as others; his unfunny joke by Descartes in sec. 5 seems awkward and unhelpful, at least to me.)
Does his drawing on European roots and examples suggest that his focus will be on Europe –- indeed, that he was “hired” to re-evangelize Europe? I think his heavily Euro tone does raise a question: how will his program go over in other cultures and less developed countries? The only vaguely non-Western example I noticed in the Encyclical was drawn from Mother Theresa of Calcutta, a nun born in Albania.
3. Another point concerns the relationship of love and justice, which is a major theme of the Encyclical. “Deus Caritas Est” seems to suggest that “love” is for the Church and its ministries, while “justice” is the job of the State. “The Church cannot and must not take upon herself the battle to bring about the most just society possible.” (Sec. 28, a, par. 4) There seems to be no sense that the Church, too, is subject to the requirements of justice, no sense that the Church may even have the calling to become –- indeed, the potential actually to be -- a model for justice, a lived-out example for all the world. The only part for the Church to play seems to be “through rational argument” and “reawaken[ing] spiritual energy” for the doing of justice. (From the same paragraph.)
4. One further observation. I would welcome a fuller explanation of some of the terms in the Encyclical. One such phrase is “the purification of reason.” Even though the Encyclical does elaborate by saying that “faith liberates reason from its blind spots and therefore helps it to be ever more fully itself,” I am not sure what that really involves. Another term is “subsidiarity.” That word appears to encompass grassroots initiative and authority, which at first glance seems happily in keeping with my own preference for hands-on, bottom-up, Congregationally-rooted democracy. Then I noticed that “subsidiarity” for Benedict involves “the State... generously acknowledg[ing] and support[ing]” such initiatives. So “subsidiarity” seems to be something conceded by the state. Shades of feudalism.
Not even hinted at in the Encyclical (because it really is another subject altogether) is a very different item which will very likely be on Benedict’s agenda. His proven administrative skills place him in a position to take on restructuring the Vatican. Benedict himself has suggested that making the Vatican leaner would make it more approachable by other communions and other faiths. The expectation is that a major reorganization, including downsizing, is in the offing. Maybe he was hired to do that, too.
But a big reason for visiting this year has to do with the future. I was eager to see Pope Benedict XVI in action and get a sense of who he is and what he is doing. In his transition from Vatican II theological expert to Professor to Vatican bureaucrat he has re-invented himself in the past. Will that happen again? What will be the prospects for ecumenism during his papacy?
For those who would like a careful assessment of his role in recent years I suggest the article by Paul Elie entitled “The Year of two Popes” in the January – February 2006 Atlantic Monthly. From my own observations I’d say it is an insightful and helpful piece.
And I would add, from what I’ve seen, that there do not seem to be many clear expectations of what Papa Ratzinger (his name in Italian usage) is likely to do. He is well-known -- and unknown. As Paul Elie points out, he has been most powerfully affected by his previous academic and bureaucratic callings, whereas John Paul II, whom Benedict refers to as “Our Great Predecessor” (all caps -- “Insignis Decessor Noster”), was most powerfully affected by his country of origin. In spite of Benedict’s preference for the scholarly life he is very personable and focuses on each individual with warmth and real attention, with the love he speaks of in his recently available first Encyclical, “Deus Caritas Est” (“God Is Love”).
And that is another lens for looking at Benedict XVI. Some points I noticed from my first reading:
1. One concerns his style. A number of observers have called it “lucid.” His phrasing flows smoothly. Ever the teacher, he seems to have made his watchword “faith, hope, and clarity.” He makes use of modern Biblical scholarship. And he can turn a phrase. A couple of examples from the Encyclical: “God does not demand of us a feeling which we ourselves are incapable of producing.” “God’s passionate love for his people... is so great that it turns God against himself, his love against his justice.” “What we have [in much modern thinking]... is really an inhuman philosophy. People of the present are sacrificed to the molech of the future...”
2. Another observation concerns is his classical Euro-centrism. He talks about Julian the Apostate, Nietzsche, St. Martin of Tours. He quotes Virgil, Tertullian, Ignatius, Sallust, Pope Gregory the Great, Descartes, and a passage from St. Augustine’s City of God which is a particular favorite of mine (IV,4). (Unfortunately, some of these references do not seem to work so well as others; his unfunny joke by Descartes in sec. 5 seems awkward and unhelpful, at least to me.)
Does his drawing on European roots and examples suggest that his focus will be on Europe –- indeed, that he was “hired” to re-evangelize Europe? I think his heavily Euro tone does raise a question: how will his program go over in other cultures and less developed countries? The only vaguely non-Western example I noticed in the Encyclical was drawn from Mother Theresa of Calcutta, a nun born in Albania.
3. Another point concerns the relationship of love and justice, which is a major theme of the Encyclical. “Deus Caritas Est” seems to suggest that “love” is for the Church and its ministries, while “justice” is the job of the State. “The Church cannot and must not take upon herself the battle to bring about the most just society possible.” (Sec. 28, a, par. 4) There seems to be no sense that the Church, too, is subject to the requirements of justice, no sense that the Church may even have the calling to become –- indeed, the potential actually to be -- a model for justice, a lived-out example for all the world. The only part for the Church to play seems to be “through rational argument” and “reawaken[ing] spiritual energy” for the doing of justice. (From the same paragraph.)
4. One further observation. I would welcome a fuller explanation of some of the terms in the Encyclical. One such phrase is “the purification of reason.” Even though the Encyclical does elaborate by saying that “faith liberates reason from its blind spots and therefore helps it to be ever more fully itself,” I am not sure what that really involves. Another term is “subsidiarity.” That word appears to encompass grassroots initiative and authority, which at first glance seems happily in keeping with my own preference for hands-on, bottom-up, Congregationally-rooted democracy. Then I noticed that “subsidiarity” for Benedict involves “the State... generously acknowledg[ing] and support[ing]” such initiatives. So “subsidiarity” seems to be something conceded by the state. Shades of feudalism.
Not even hinted at in the Encyclical (because it really is another subject altogether) is a very different item which will very likely be on Benedict’s agenda. His proven administrative skills place him in a position to take on restructuring the Vatican. Benedict himself has suggested that making the Vatican leaner would make it more approachable by other communions and other faiths. The expectation is that a major reorganization, including downsizing, is in the offing. Maybe he was hired to do that, too.
posted by David at 5:17 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home