The Independent News Source
NCR on Kindle - NCR classifieds - YouTube - Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
Printer-friendly version
PDF versionThree things we learned from Benedict's Germany trip
by John L Allen Jr on Sep. 30, 2011
Last Sunday Pope Benedict XVI wrapped up a four-day trip to Germany, which, depending upon whose word you take, either generated “widespread acclaim” (Italian commentator Sandro Magister) or a national yawn (the Munich daily Sueddeutsche Zeitung’s headline was, “He came, he spoke, he disappointed.”)
This was the German pope’s third homecoming, though his first state visit, and the 21st foreign trip of his papacy.
At one level, it’s tempting to say things were pretty much par for the course. As usual, expectations of massive protest didn’t pan out; while a few thousand demonstrators took to the streets in Berlin (brandishing “Donate a condom for the pope!” signs), most of Benedict’s opponents simply tuned him out, while the pope drew 320,000 over four days. Also as usual, intrepid Italian reporters created news when the pope didn’t supply it. Over-hyped accounts of an air gun being fired before a papal Mass in Erfurt got the juices flowing on Saturday, while Sunday was devoted to first floating, then debunking, a rumor that the pope would resign at 85.
There were precious few surprises, though we did get a reminder that Benedict has a sense of humor. During a speech to the federal parliament, the pope referenced a German intellectual who changed his mind on something while in his eighties, and added: “I find it comforting that rational thought is evidently still possible at the age of 84!”
Despite the generally familiar flavor of the trip, there were a few nuggets along the way with something to say about Benedict’s papacy and the direction of the church on his watch. Herewith, then, three things we learned from the pope’s trip to Germany.
1) A sensation as cultural critic
Pop quiz: What do the Collège des Bernardins in Paris, Westminster Hall in London, and now the Reichstag building in Berlin have in common? The answer, in papal terms, is that they have been the settings for arguably the most triumphant moments of Benedict’s papacy -- occasions when the cerebral pontiff dazzled secular audiences with an oratorical tour de force on faith, reason, and the foundations of democratic society.
Whatever one makes of Benedict as a religious leader, he’s a sensation as a cultural critic. True to form, his Sept. 22 speech to the Bundestag, the national parliament, quickly became the latest candidate for “best speech of his papacy.”
Addressing German lawmakers, but really speaking to Western culture generally, Benedict took on logical positivism -- the view that only empirical science counts as real knowledge, and that all moral claims are subjective. It’s a widespread conviction, the pope said, but inadequate as the basis of a just society. Without belief in some form of natural law, he argued, there’s no foundation for universal human rights. That means “humanity is threatened”, because the only thing left as the basis for law and politics is the raw will to power.
Subscribe to NCR
Want to read more about important issues in the life of the Church? A subscription to NCR will keep you up to date and informed.
Germany’s Nazi past, Benedict XVI said, offers a harrowing reminder of what happens when “power becomes divorced from right.”
The role of religious groups in a democracy, the pope suggested, is not to “propose a revealed law to the state and to society,” but rather to hold up “nature and reason” as reliable sources for making moral choices about the social order -- including, he stressed, respect for pluralism and diversity.
On this terrain, Benedict XVI can be surprising, and even lyrical. Before the Bundestag, the surprise came in his praise of the environmental movement, which, he said, represents “a cry for fresh air,” a realization that nature does indeed contain a moral compass. (Ironically, several Greens were among 70 politicians who boycotted the speech). Benedict’s poetic streak, meanwhile, surfaced in likening positivism to a “concrete bunker with no windows”, which shuts out the natural light of moral and spiritual truth.
Secular media outlets, even those which were otherwise critical, raved about the speech. Der Spiegel called it “courageous” and “brilliant,” while Bild quoted a prominent lawmaker hailing it as a “masterpiece.” Even Die Welt grudgingly allowed that it was “not completely without cunning.” (In a further indication that Benedict got through, the left-wing London Guardian published a lengthy commentary on the speech, encouraging secular environmentalists to see past their stereotypes of the pope as “a prissy and repressed German professor”.)
In these venues, Benedict also wins points for style. He comes off as gracious and thoughtful, a contrast to the blowhards and ideologues who dominate public life. As George Weigel recently put it, he seems “the world’s premier adult.”
All this suggests a note of encouragement for Catholic movers and shakers everywhere. Controversy swirls around the church these days, a point Benedict acknowledged elsewhere in Germany by saying that sometimes the scandals of the sexual abuse crisis have overshadowed the “scandal” of the faith, meaning Christ’s death on the Cross, his resurrection, and eternal life. Yet despite that, when a Catholic leader has something incisive to say, and finds a way to say it that’s both timely and effective, it’s still possible to get people thinking.
2) The ecumenical future: Collaboration, but not communion
Benedict’s return to the Land of Luther was always destined to be scrutinized for its impact on ecumenical relations, especially with the Protestant churches of the Reformation. On that score, to put it politely, Benedict drew mixed reviews.
The pope clearly signaled his ecumenical commitment, presiding over a service with a Lutheran bishop in the Erfurt monastery were Martin Luther was ordained an Augustinian monk. The pontiff expressed admiration for Luther’s passionate quest to understand God’s mercy, and Archbishop Robert Zollitsch, president of the German bishops conference, even said that Benedict asked him to find a way for the Catholic church to participate in celebrations of the 500th anniversary of the Protestant Reformation in 2017 -- by any standard, a remarkably irenic touch from a Roman Pontiff.
Yet Benedict didn’t offer any breakthroughs, or even signals of flexibility, on the contentious points in Catholic/Lutheran relations, such as inter-communion or mixed marriages. For those who believe such reforms are a prerequisite to progress, the performance therefore left much to be desired.
Pundit Klaus Krämer, for instance, wrote that Benedict still styles “the Catholic church as the ‘cruise ship,’ while the Protestant church is, at best, a ‘container ship’ that should follow the Vatican’s course.” The Frankfurter Rundschau was even more acerbic, calling the trip an “ecumenical disaster” and Benedict’s approach to Protestants “spectacularly half-hearted, patronizing, and callous.”
In a speech to Protestant leaders in Erfurt, Benedict identified two priorities for ecumenical relations in the 21st century:
- The “new geography of Christianity,” by which the pope seemed to mean the dramatic growth of Pentecostal and Evangelical Christianity around the world, especially in the southern hemisphere. He called it “a form of Christianity with little institutional depth, little rationality and even less dogmatic content, and with little stability” -- implying that whatever their differences, Catholics and Lutherans still have more in common with one another than, say, the Brazilian Pentecostal “Church of Christ’s Spit.”
- Secularism in the West, where “God is increasingly being driven out of our society” and the history of revelation recounted in Scripture is “locked into an ever more remote past.” Secularism puts all Christians in the same boat, the pope said, just as they once faced a common threat from the Nazis -- and just as the witness of the martyrs gave rise to the ecumenical movement of the 20th century, he said, today a common faith lived within the secular world is “the most powerful ecumenical force that brings us together.”
What seemed clear from the Germany trip is that Benedict XVI regards collaboration in responding to these external challenges as the near-term future of the ecumenical movement -- and not, therefore, structural unity that might lead to inter-communion. The ecumenical agenda on his watch, in other words, is more ad extra than ad intra.
3) Common Ground on Reform?
Though Benedict probably didn’t need it, his trip offered reminders that it isn’t just Protestants with an axe to grind; plenty of German Catholics are disgruntled too. For instance, the country’s president, a divorced and civilly remarried Catholic named Christian Wulff, pointedly told the pope on Friday, “Many ask themselves how mercifully the church treats people who have suffered break-ups in their lives,” and advised the church “to remain close to the people and not turn inward on itself.”
In Freiburg, tens of thousands of young Catholics held an overnight vigil on Saturday, awaiting the pontiff’s final Mass. As part of the warm-up act, organizers at one point passed out green and red inflatable sticks and asked the young people to use them to respond to an informal poll, holding up green for “yes” and red for “no.”
In response to the statement “I model my life after standards set in Rome,” a vast wave of red rolled through the crowd. For “Confession doesn’t play much of a role in my life,” however, as well as “Women carry too little responsibility in the church,” the dominant color was green. Red mounted a strong comeback when the question switched to, “Is the practice of homosexuality a sin?”
Against that backdrop, Benedict’s Sept. 25 address in the Freiburg Concert House, speaking before what was described as a cross-section of Catholics “involved in the church and in society,” was fairly unique in the annals of papal rhetoric.
For one thing, the pope didn’t mince words about the social realities: “For some decades now, we have been experiencing a decline in religious practice and we have been seeing substantial numbers of the baptized drifting away from church life,” he said. He then posed precisely the question most reformers ask: “Must the church not adapt her offices and structures to the present day, in order to reach the doubting and searching people of today?”
In response, Benedict XVI said that tinkering with ecclesial structures is not the answer.
Real reform, he implied, is interior and spiritual, not external and structural. He cited Mother Theresa, who was once asked what the first thing to change in the church would be. Her famous reply was, “You and me.”
That’s a familiar note, and could seem to suggest an unbridgeable gulf between two models of reform: structural and spiritual. (Benedict himself hinted at the divide, suggesting that a sincere agnostic is preferable to a lukewarm believer who sees the church in merely institutional terms.)
Despite that apparent impasse, there was a twist to Benedict’s vision of renewal, one which hints at a possible intersection between spiritual and structural reform: His enthusiasm for reducing the power and privilege of the church.
In the address in the Freiburg Concert House, Benedict called upon the church to embrace “worldly poverty,” so that her “missionary witness shines more brightly.” He even went so far as to suggest that historically, secularization has been an agent of reform, because it has liberated the church from “material and political burdens and privileges.”
As Sandro Magister noted, “Never before had [Benedict] given such prominence to the ideal of a church poor in structures, in possessions, in power.”
The Germany trip, in other words, may have uncovered a surprising zone of common ground between the pope and reform forces -- the press for a humbler church, one which speaks to the world more out of poverty than power. That, at least, seems a place where conversation is possible.
[John L. Allen Jr. is NCR senior correspondent. His e-mail address is jallen@ncronline.org.]
A solid report on the Pope's
A solid report on the Pope's visit to Germany. Those who think reform means that the Church should become less Catholic were bound to be disappointed. Where the Church has echoed the secular culture is where it has declined the most.
@Fr. J: There is more at play
@Fr. J:
There is more at play in societies, in your words, [Where the Church has echoed the secular culture] having "declined the most."
As more and more Catholics, especially women, in developing societies and cultures are educated and gain real economic power, watch for the same "secularization" that B16 so often laments to increase. This is the historical fact everywhere one looks.
What secularization and flagging allegiance to the Catholic Church has occurred in Western Europe [even in places like Poland and Ireland] and North America, is also beginning in developing societies and economies.
Either the church evolves or it will become humanity's vestigial organ.
The US is a very advanced
The US is a very advanced society, but it is also extremely religious. The more conservative brands of Christianity are growing the fastest in the US and even in Europe. The more liberal brands are visibly dying even when they do everything you demand. I would argue that it is society that needs to evolve and be permeated by the gospel, including the counter cultural parts such as reverence for life.
Fr. J, The real problem is
Fr. J,
The real problem is the rampant secular monitarist, consumerist, unregulated Capitalist, militarist culture of the JPII-Reagan-Ayn Rand Repub party that the pope and the hierarchs constantly support/enable. IOW, the pope and the hierarchs are doing themselves in, by THEIR OWN HAND.
IOW, when the laws of God and the teachings of Christ are not followed, then evil follows!!!
Bob, you aren't a college
Bob, you aren't a college freshman spouting off what your poly sci profs are telling you...are you? How about I give it a try? The real problem is the secular, left wing, communist, socialist, Obama messiah, appeasement oriented, Democrat party hacks and their allies in the Church.
If you want to follow the teachings of Christ then consider following Pope Benedict.
Fr. J on Oct. 05, 2011. You
Fr. J on Oct. 05, 2011.
You stated:
"Bob, you aren't a college freshman spouting off what your poly sci profs are telling you...are you? How about I give it a try? The real problem is the secular, left wing, communist, socialist, Obama messiah, appeasement oriented, Democrat party hacks and their allies in the Church.
If you want to follow the teachings of Christ then consider following Pope Benedict."
---------------------------------------
Let's start with your last comment first---"If you want to follow the teachings of Christ then consider following Pope Benedict". Why then, does both he and the bishops show such obvious avoidance of so many of Jesus' major teachings?
We have Jesus' direct and clear teachings on issues such as nonviolence, a simple lifestyle (certainly not the popes or many of the bishops' forte), love of the poor, forgiveness, love of enemies, inclusivity, mercy, and not seeking status, power, perks, and possessions. Throughout history, all these teachings have been overwhelmingly ignored by the popes and a majority of bishops.
Notice that Jesus' teachings required of Peter, the Apostles (and their successors) a change of lifestyle, of security systems, a laying aside the desires of wielding power, laying aside wealth, and status symbols.
Instead the Church (the teachings of popes and bishops) were usually intellectual beliefs or moral superiority stances that ask little of them and little of the People of God. So the Church emphasized instead: the divinity of Christ, the virgin birth, the atonement theory, the beliefs about reproduction and sex. And popes have over the decades have taken fright at progress in the sciences, technologies, forms of government (and by the way, Fr. J---both Popes Leo XIII and Pius IX condemned "Americanism"---in their minds---a branch of 'modernism'.)
In dealing with the 'communist and socialist' elements (that you obviously condemn), I suggest that you form the more temperate attitude of John XXIII in his "Pacem in terris" with:
"a clear distinction between false philosophical teachings regarding the nature, origin, and destiny of the universe and of human beings, and movements which have a direct bearing eithr on economic and social questions, or cultural matters or on the organization of the state, even if these movements owe their origin and inspiration to these false tenets"
(n. 159, David J. O'Brien and Thomas J. Shannon, eds., "Catholic Social Thought: The Documentary Heritage" (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1992)p. 157.
BTW---were you aware that Obama (before he bacame President), was a frequent visitor to Loyola University's Library? His reading material? Catholic Social Encyclicals and related commentaries. He may just have a much better grasp of what is contained in Catholic Social Doctrines than some priests do.
LittleBear, let me take your
LittleBear, let me take your points one by one:
1. The Pope and Bishops are not at variance with the teachings of Christ. Jesus said to his apostles "he who hears you hears me." Also he commissioned Peter, gave him the power to bind and loose, and to sustain the brethren. From the Catholic standpoint we believe that the Pope and Bishops in union with him exercise the magisterium, that is from Vatican II btw. So if anyone is avoiding Jesus' teaching that would be you.
2. You take it upon yourself to list the essential teaching of Jesus. By what authority do you teach? That aside, while many Catholics have not lived up to our moral teachings that does not mean they lacked the authority to teach. I would argue that many from the dissenters side have an unabashed desire for power and no mercy at all. I well remember my first encounter with a radical feminist liturgist. She could have taught the Borgia's something about manipulation.
3. I think if you look at recent Popes, including Benedict, you will find that they do live simply and practice more penance then you probably do. Btw, Jesus did not demand that the apostles give up ownership or use of property. Jesus was not a communist.
4. The Popes ask a great deal from themselves and from us. It is not easy to be a good Catholic. To use a quote from Cheers, "Catholicism is not a religion for wooseys." All of those teachings you list are intrinsic to Catholicism, such as the divinity of Christ. If you don't believe them then you are not a Christian or you are an apostate. If you want to be Catholic they come with the package. The Popes were right in condemning modernism. Some progress has been rather negative, such as nuclear bombs which I assume you do not like.
5. Temperate? About a totalitarian materialist ideology that killed over 100 million people? I think not. As a peace lover you should abhor communism. So should the 2 authors of that dated screed.
6. Obama obviously didn't read The Gospel of Life. He is currently trying to force the Catholic Church to pay for abortifacient contraceptives and sterilization. His eye is on making us pay for abortion. He offers no real conscience exemption, contrary to past religious accommodation. He is the most anti-life and anti-Catholic leader in US history. God help us.
"If you want to follow the
"If you want to follow the teachings of Christ then consider following Pope Benedict."
Hmmm.....why not follow Christ? What you are suggesting is that he follow the 'the teachings of Christ as interpreted by Uncle Benny'. When Jesus said "Come to me all you who are weary...." I don't recall it being "Come to me, through an interpreter/pretender, all you who are weary......" :)
Perhaps this was the 'inside truth' your received in seminary............
Cheers,
Let Benedict learn before he
Let Benedict learn before he speaks.
On Culture: Doesn't he recognize that the "Church," meaning the hierarchy, received its culture directly from the Roman empire. Let him get rid of the false model of hierarchical rule, the idea that only "priests" are fully Christian, before he talks to anyone about his/her culture.
On Ecumenism: The Roman Church, again meaning the hierarchy, is the offending party. Let him get rid of the hierarchy's "sanctified" will to power, and the ecumenical problem will be solved.
On Reform: The first reform would be to get rid of the false teaching that Christ left us a hierarchical church. It is specifically heretical to make every minister of any kind in the Catholic church swear an oath to the pope and the hierarchical principle before taking office. From this Catholic's perspective, that is damnable.
The accounts that I have read
The accounts that I have read indicate that the trip to Germany was without any new or interesting statements. The Pope quoted Mother Theresa as saying that what needs to change in the church is "you and me", but he was not referring to himself. He will not change, and those who wait for change wait on this pope in vain.
You've got it exactly. I
You've got it exactly. I rephrased the "three things that we learned" about the pope's visit to Germany as: nothing, nothing, nothing.
Pope John Paul II also
Pope John Paul II also suggested the Church embrace "worldly poverty." There wasn't exactly a mass exodus of the bishops from the mansions then, and I doubt if there will be now.
A fresh new from The
A fresh new from The Tablet:
Lehmann defends Pope in church tax row
5 October 2011
Cardinal Karl Lehmann, the Bishop of Mainz, said Catholics should "tread very warily" when interpreting Pope Benedict XVI's appeal for the Church to "detach herself from the tendency towards worldliness", after his words resulted in immediate calls for the abolition of Germany's church tax. The Pope, speaking in Freiburg on 25 September at the end of his four-day visit to Germany, meant that the Church must distance itself from the powers of temptation without abdicating responsibility, the cardinal wrote in an article in the daily Frankfurter Allgemeine. Church tax, which is deducted at source, has made the German Church one of the richest Churches in the world and its clergy among the most highly paid.
I will never be as
I will never be as congenitally sanguine as John Allen is about this pope and the hierarchy.
But, I do agree that the shift in Ratzinger's tone during the recent papal trip to Germany is indicative that even B16, however insulated and isolated by his cronies behind Vatican walls, understands that the hierarchy better make "nice" with reformist elements in the church, or risk being consigned to the dust bin of history in short order.
Please, please, please Ratzinger: NO MORE LECTURES ABOUT SECULARISM AND MORAL RELATIVISM - especially from you after you, in concert with your "brother bishops," have orchestrated over decades a massive cover-up and denial of the rape and sodomy of children by priests and bishops!!!
Of course, the essential Christian reform is a "metanoia" [or change] of the heart if the church is to endure. [Apparently, Mother Theresa got some things right despite her long night of the soul.]
Catholics are not demanding just the "tinkering with ecclesial structures" that Allen attributes to B16 - as usual the hierarchs see the world through their own narcissistic lenses.
Catholics have already concluded that what is required in this time and place is the wholesale reform and renewal of the priesthood from parish to pope if the kerygma is to endure.
It is becoming more and more evident that absent any leadership from Ratzinger and the hierarchs for these reforms, Catholics will have to take matters into their own hands if the church will even see the end of this century.
Time is running out for Ratzinger and the hierarchs.
Jim, we are getting wholesale
Jim, we are getting wholesale reform. There is a ban on homosexuals being ordained. We are cracking down on dissent. The liturgy is being renewed according to the documents of Vatican II. But one of the real enemies is moral relativism. I find it strange that you say you oppose abuse, but then support the philosophy that helped create the problem. Some Catholics did take so-called reform into their own hands and look where it got us. Pope Benedict is showing us the way to real reform.
PS: Would it be possible for you to comment on just one article without mentioning the abuse issue? There is a new law that covers this phenomenon:
In any online discussion where the topic is the Catholic Church, its leaders or beliefs, as the discussion thread grows longer, the probability of a reference to pedophile priests approaches 1 (100%).
Corollary 1: The reference will be not only invalid but inappropriate and abusive.
Corollary 2: The earlier the reference is made, the greater the probability the rest of the discussion will follow the reference down a rabbit hole.
Fr. J: BOTTOMS UP!
Fr. J:
BOTTOMS UP!
Fr. J, If you are indeed a
Fr. J,
If you are indeed a Fr., you know full well that the church has been served well and faithfully by many, many gay priests and bishops. The ban on ordination of gays is no answer to the problem of child abuse by priests. It is no reform, it is a denial of reality.
HOMOSEXUAL PRIESTS .....Hi
HOMOSEXUAL PRIESTS .....Hi Fr. J. I'm back for now. Advance warning, however. If you are considering any libelous staements about any of my comments, I will just subpoena NCR for your real name and sue you for libel. Fortunately, as a lawyer, it will not cost me a penny. With that business out of the way, I recommend to you and NCR readers a great article by noted NT scholar, Luke Timothy Johnson, on the acceptability of homosexuality under NT analysis, The article is accessible by clicking on to http://commonwealmagazine.org/homosexuality-church-1
Robert, you need to remove
Robert, you need to remove your head from the sand. You are denying the reality. I know that from the inside. It is already solving the problem.
"I know that from the
"I know that from the inside."
You know, "J" this is the second time you have claimed that you "know from the inside". The other instance was when you stated, "Everyone wants to cover up the obvious, but those of us on the inside know the truth." http://www.ncronline.org/blogs/all-things-catholic/policy-myth-versus-ac...
I was reflecting upon your insider truth--if you knew this to be true did you report the abuses you witnessed? Or did you do anything to help the abused person? Did you cover up for the cleric? If this is true perhaps you wouldn't mind providing us with a link or newspaper article in support of your heroics?
I suspect that for you to know the 'inside truth' you will have witnessed the abuse and determined if the abuser was straight or gay and then reported it to the proper authorities (your bishop doesn't count as the proper authority), yes? It sure would add a bit to your credibility if you could back up your statements! If you didn't report your inside truth, pray tell, why not? Afraid of losing your pension? your position? your status? :)
Cheers,
"Corollary 2: The earlier the
"Corollary 2: The earlier the reference is made, the greater the probability the rest of the discussion will follow the reference down a rabbit hole."
You know, J, I was thinking the same thing about your "Fr." reference! :)
Cheers,
"Corollary 1: The reference
"Corollary 1: The reference will be not only invalid but inappropriate and abusive."
J, You may have a point here and as I reflected upon your comments I recalled this one which I think proves your point! "Like I said, we can see who
Submitted by Fr. J (not verified) on Sep. 15, 2011.
"If the statistics are correct then the vast majority of abuse cases are homosexual in nature, that is a FACT." --It contains all three of your descriptors; it is invalid (as in non-applicable and untrue) it is inappropriate (calumny)and abusive to our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters!("We get name calling, anger,.........")
Cheers,
Yes yes...lets follow the
Yes yes...lets follow the path of the Anglican communion and adopt the modern culture hook line and sinker. Did you read the report read at their annual conference in London? The average age is 60 and they dont expect to be of around in twenty years. The fruits of false reform.
Well gosh darn it all,
Well gosh darn it all, gerard, if your statement doesn't exactly sound like what's happening in the Catholic church. and, no, there is no seminary that is 'bursting at the seams' with rabidly right winged priestly candidates, (that canard has been around since the beginning of Vatican II as a defense against any progressive thought on the part of --intelligent-- theologians, etc).
The Catholic church has had a massive exodus over the past few decades, and, indeed young people are conspicuously absent week in and week out. And the average age for the vast majorities of the congregants is about --70-- these days.
Them are the facts.
The trip was much ado about
The trip was much ado about nothing except when B16 wore a stole w/ a tiara triple crown on it representing the power of the papacy to the ecumenical prayer service with the Lutherans.
Very tacky and lacked in sensitivity.
I wonder what he would have done if the Lutheran bishop had worn a stole w/ a cutout of Luther on it w/ a bubble that said the pope was the anti-Christ? But she wouldn't have done so, she's a class act.
Great speech, but in an old
Great speech, but in an old tradition. The Bishops of Gaul (France and Spain), after the collapse of the Roman Empire's central government but not that of many Roman city-states, spoke up to their new German tribal rulers as Romans, not as Christians, explaining that taxes are to be used for the common good (roads, aquaducts, schools, libraries, baths, manumission of slaves, etc.) and not for the enrichment of the king and his family. Of course the barbarians prevailed, private enrichment being in their minds the sole purpose of all assets, a we see triumphant in the USA today, a view often aggressively advocated by Catholics.
Speeches are no thing, behavior another and the right wing cafeteria Catholics pick and choose differently from the left wing cafeteria Catholics. And this will not change.
ACTIONS,NOT
ACTIONS,NOT WORDS!..........John, the Roman clique (Ratzinger, Bertone, Sodano, Levada, Law, et al.) will just love this piece from their favorite U.S. publicist ( not counting George Weigel, Bill Donahue, etc.). Their American office boys (Wuerl, Dolan, Chaput,et al.) will also love it. The pope writes well; I must say that. But it is actions that count. He is supposed to be a leader, an executive, not just a propagandist. Objective observers, who do not depend on the Roman clique for their livelihood, will see past your predictable spin. ........................The German trip was an utter failure. Bishops, theologians, priests, ecumenical partners, the authentic faithful (both Catholic and other), abuse survivors, et al. did not expect much, and got less. Cultural criticism? Please! As is made clear in the comments of those who have known the pope for over 50 years, he is still recoiling from his bad experience with student demonstrators in the '60's. One knowlegeable commentator who knows the pope well even made an apt comparison to Pius XI's extraordinarily negative reaction to the revolt of Italian nationalists. Please see http://www.commonwealmagazine.org/blog/?p=15277 .................................... The pope's arrogant dismissal of Lutherans' simple desire to permit husbands and wives and families in mixed marriages to receive the Eucharist together is truly unChristian. Even Cardinal Kasper appears appalled (but not surprised) by this. If this pope had selected the guests at the Last Supper, one would have to have expected that Jesus would have ended up eating alone, listening to Bach cantatas while reciting arcane Latin chants in between bites. Of course, the Roman clique could then alter DaVinci's picture to a single person as proof of the primacy of the pope! .....................Let's be honest here. John, you must see where the Roman clique is heading. The Roman clique is converting the Church into a cult funded by secret funds from right-wing supporters. This is, of course, just a continuation of the Roman clique's policies since John XXIII died in 1963, as suggested by Tom Roberts's current NCR article and the comment thereto available by clicking on to http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/vatican-ii-eye-witness-speaks-out ............... I tend to agree with you that the only real hope may be your "blessing in disguise" in the form of the anticipated prosecution of the Roman clique at the International Criminal Court as further discussed in the comment entitled "POPE IN HANDCUFFS?" accessible by clicking on to your recent article at http://ncronline/blogs/all-things-catholic/blessing-vatican-really-deep-... .............The Spirit really works in strange ways. The only Good News out when the pope was in Germany were the leaked reports in the Italian press that the pope is planning to retire next April. It appears that this leak was intended to forestall the negative reactions to the visit that otherwise would have likely been issued by German and Austrian bishops in light of the pope's dismal visit. ...............Let us get moving and begin to return the Church to the consensual structure of the early Christians. The Roman absolute monarchy is finito! We must not only elect a new pope; we must use this opportunity to convene a worldwide assembly of lay and clerical Catholics to begin to return the Church to its Gospel roots. I am sure the Spirit can leave his/her work at the Haugue to help us clean up this ecclesiastical disaster.
JOHN ALLEN'S ICC VIEW: The
JOHN ALLEN'S ICC VIEW: The correct link for John's NCR article suggesting the filing of the complaint against the pope with the International Criminal Court may be a "blessing in disguise" is availble by clicking on http://ncronline.org/blogs/all-things-catholic/blessing/vatican/really/d... Please also note my comment under the heading, "POPE IN HANDCUFFS?"
You're responding to your own
You're responding to your own post? I thought you gave up on NCR because you called an ecumenical synod and no one came?
Hilarious!
Hilarious!
ECUMENICAL SYNOD? Thanks,
ECUMENICAL SYNOD? Thanks, Jennie, your quick wit suggests some intelligence. Since you never replied substantively to my comments, I cannot really tell. It appears you didn't hear about the Synod. We held it in Brazil, where the most Catholics live. Of 5,000 bishops worldwide, 4,996 attended. The Roman clique (Messrs. Ratzinger, Bertone, Sodano and Levada) were absent, purportly they were working on their defense against the crimes against humanity charges at the International Criminal Court. The remaining 4,996 bishops to the last man said they couldn't open their mouths because they didn't have permission slips from the Roman clique. They all expressed fear of being summarily sandbagged like their brother bishop, William Morris of Australia, recently was. I observed that all of them were doing quite well in their medieval custumes. Since they weren't allowed to express themselves, we had a fashion show instead. As expected, Cardinal Burke won with his outrageously expensive duds. A good time was had by all, except for the billion Catholics who want the hierarchy to clean up their act. It was so nice, Jennie, to hear from you and have this opportunity to talk about the Synod that seems so important to you. Let's hope we have a real one next April when the pope retires. No more fashion shows for me anyways! LOL
The challenge the Vatican has
The challenge the Vatican has with credibility can be addressed ....
"Benedict XVI said that tinkering with ecclesial structures is not the answer."
I think he's wrong
The inference that those
The inference that those pushing structural reform are not intereste in spiritual reform is insulting. The purpose of structural reform is to clear the brush so that the light of Christ can shine through. Stupid policies like the new translation fo the liturgy make it more difficult for Christ message to get through. This blocks spiritual reform.
I am wondering what would be
I am wondering what would be the outcome if Benedict applied this intellectualism to the Catholic church.
The only people who were
The only people who were disappointed by the Ppe and his German trip and all the sppeches and gestures there are the radical liberal "We are Church" dissenters who favor all out Holy Communion sharing and other inter-religious initiatives with Lutherans, women priests,married priests, rights for gays, the divorced, etc. etc. (yawn).
But traditional/traditionalist Catholics were heartened that Pope Benedict XVI did not go in for any pro-ecumenism with Lutherans grand gesture of appeasment like another recent Pope might have done, nor was he especially warm with Lutherans. Faithful Catholics were also thrilled that he did not deign even to answer the bizarre demands and issues of some German/Austrian Catholics. Instead, he highlighted what being a true Catholic is, and called us to Faithfulness to it.
Newspapers now are calling the trip a disaster because Protestants are seriously disappointed. This is no loss to Catholics.
God Bless our Pope for standing firm for the Catholic Faith of all time.
Kenjiro Shoda, Sorry, but
Kenjiro Shoda, Sorry, but Lutherans expected nothing from this pope's trip and they were not disappointed. The German Catholics are going to speed up their departure from Benedict's Fantasyland Catholicism, his return to autocratic triumphalism, his blatant willingness to absorb the SSPX heretics into the Church, his continuing cover-up of massive corruption throughout the Church, and his efforts to push down the throats of all Catholics an antique liturgy few want.
The Austrian and German churches will be leading the way toward secession from the shell of what's left of Roman Catholicism. With a new, enlightened, and reformed Church to replace it and with Catholic laity, the true presbyterate from which the entire sacramental priesthood is derived,at last, in control.
"...leading the way toward
"...leading the way toward secession."
I guess like the dissident Episcopalians from the Episcopal Church? And dissident Anglicans from the Anglican Communion? But it is not working. The Episcopal Church and Anglican Communion together are not giving dissidents anything; not even letting them use Anglican churches (that they are leavng behind) for worship. I don't think dissident Germans and Austrians will do any better with Catholic dioceses and parish buildings, schools, institutes, etc. Maybe the Austrian bishops will be more generous and let them use a few churches to carry on dissident liturgies. But Anglican just don't allow it among their dissidents.
I trust other objective
I trust other objective reviews will follow.
OK, so he's better in his own
OK, so he's better in his own L1. (Linguistic jargon for native tongue).
As usual, John, you put the
As usual, John, you put the most hopeful spin on things. But watch the numbers: I expect the number of German Catholics to officially leave the Church to accelerate.
"Real reform, he implied, is
"Real reform, he implied, is interior and spiritual, not external and structural."
As a former philosophy professor, Benedict XVI should know that is a false dichotomy. Spiritual renewal and church reform are not mutually exclusive. Indeed, they go hand in hand.
As you have reported several
As you have reported several times before, B16's version of ecumenism is to have all the religions unite in a war vs. abortion, gay marriage, embryonic stem cell research, and in favor of Europe as a "Christian" entity, etc. In short, B16, like most old men who are set in their ways, cares far more about preserving the culture into which he was born and raised than in the transcendent gospel. He will fail.
Talk is cheap and that's all
Talk is cheap and that's all we hear from the Church include B16. I, for one, would like to see the Church empty its coffers to all the victims decimated by catholic sexual abuse. Words are cheap! Enough already!
Benedict talked about a
Benedict talked about a "concrete bunker with no windows” in reference to philosophical positivism. Talk about the pot calling the kettle 'black'. Earlier "the pope referenced a German intellectual who changed his mind on something while in his eighties, and added: “I find it comforting that rational thought is evidently still possible at the age of 84!” Does he think that he has "changed his mind" on some important issue. I read every major speech that he gave on his German trip, there was not a single word that even remotely suggested even a crack in his concrete bunker!
For my part, I found the most insightful message about the Christian faith coming from the youth who opposed Benedict's rigid and inflexible interpretations and also from the German president who told Benedict: “Many ask themselves how mercifully the church treats people who have suffered break-ups in their lives,” and advised the church “to remain close to the people and not turn inward on itself.”
" He even went so far as to
" He even went so far as to suggest that historically, secularization has been an agent of reform, because it has liberated the church from “material and political burdens and privileges.” Right, the word magisterial comes to mind when thinking of this 'pope' and that would be privelaged for sure. I find the whole business a bit hard to believe. On the other hand I encountered a lovely Ccatholic couple at the bus terminal, they were on their way to Toronto for an afternoon of theater and dining out. I found myself missing our time together singing ensemble at Saturday Mass. Hmmm...The paradox that is Ratzinger-Bbenedict, Serenghetti sunglasses, ruby red loafers and a handsome secretary. Some more diminution of 'privelages' on their way for 'Benedict'? Apart from an early death what's it going to take?
Your portrayal of the pope as
Your portrayal of the pope as a guru with keen insights into spiritual and cultural phenomena is laughable. You state that the “cerebral pontiff dazzled secular audiences with an oratorical tour de force on faith, reason, and the foundations of democratic society.” You go on to point out that the pope averred that without belief in some form of natural law, there’s no foundation for universal human rights.
Let’s dismiss, for the moment what makes this statement absurd: the fact that the pope has lost all credibility he might otherwise have had, had it not been for his numerous, egregious violations of the human rights of his own subjects: the victims of sexual abuse.
On at least one issue—natural law—one can agree; it plays an important role in providing a foundation for universal human rights. But even here, you—because of your sycophantic reporting—and he are off the mark because neither understands the essence of natural law.
Natural law has its source in consciousness: that of which we are aware and thus the source of all true knowledge, and thus all true spirituality. Consciousness is a state of Being, in which we grow into full awareness, thus becoming true and living Gods, changing and recreating that reality, expanding and exploring that reality, and stretching our consciousness to the limit, indeed no limit. (Conversations with God).
Without having been established in Being before we act, we resort to the poverty of our own ignorance, divining unnatural laws to support unnatural institutions that are based on fear and terror, just as Lenin, Mussolini, Mao and Hitler did as recently as the last century.
Nearly two thousand years ago, the Roman Catholic Church emerged as victors over those who understood the nature of Being (consciousness) and thus a true understanding of Natural Law. Founded on the premise that a doctrine of fear and terror was a moral premise for achieving its subjugation of humanity, the RCC eventually flourished, becoming one of the most powerful political, cultural and “spiritual” forces in the world.
Secular institutions, founded on the same basis, have risen and fallen over the millennia, some of them in the last century. But the RCC has survived. Why? Because the terror inflicted on humanity has been, by its nature, eternal: not temporal, as in the case of secular institutions.
For the subjects of Communist, Fascist, and Nazi institutions, the terror for an individual ended (or ends) with a bullet in the back of head, or some other form of deadly force or means. For the subjects of the RCC, the terror has eternal implications because of a terrifying doctrine that includes the possibility of eternal damnation.
This is why the pope’s statement--that the role of religious groups in a democracy . . . is not to “propose a revealed law to the state and to society,” but rather to hold up “nature and reason” as reliable sources for making moral choices about the social order—is inane, if not laughable.
You are the one who brought up the scandals that continue to rock the RCC and suggested that this crisis has “overshadowed the ‘scandal’ of the faith . . .” It is ironic that the word “scandal” is also used to describe a sacred tenet of the RCC, when the reality is that the real scandal was the conception RCC doctrine itself; it was created out whole cloth in the name of the One who was preaching something totally different: “Go within to find your salvation.”
If you question that assertion, explain why it was that in 180 C.E. Irenaeus wrote a five volume book, Against Heresies, castigating the Gnostics who were teaching a doctrine diametrically opposed to proto-orthodox RCC doctrine.
That’s why, “. . . holding up the Catholic idea of ‘nature and reason’ as reliable sources for making moral choices about the social order” is vacuous; it is based on an empty understanding of natural law that emanates from a bastardization of what Jesus was teaching.
One of the most egregious results of that crime is the doctrine of faith and good works as a requirement for salvation. The immorality of that doctrine is unfathomable in the light of the consequences it has had for humanity.
I don’t know of any reasonable person who would suggest that the RCC has not done a lot to ease the material, and physical suffering of the poorest of the poor in the world. But at what price: the proselytizing of the most vulnerable human beings in the world with a doctrine of fear and terror which, for those who take that doctrine—seriously—to it’s “reasoned” conclusion, find what Mother Teresa found: “Where is my faith?—even deep down […] there is nothing but emptiness & darkness.”
Variations on this theme abound in hundreds of expressions that Mother Teresa wrote during the last sixty years of her long life. They are the expressions of a dear and loving and compassionate woman whose heart went out to the poorest of the poor and undoubtedly brought joy and happiness to thousands of people with just her presence and beautiful smile. Little did they—or even her religious associates (except for her confessor superiors)—know that she suffered a spiritual deprivation that would accompany her to her grave.
The terror Mother Teresa felt—from not knowing her fate after death when she would come face to face with God to hear His judgment—is expressed in this episode: Shortly before her death, she stood before an image of Jesus, muttering “Jesus, I have never refused you anything.” Even her fanatical, life-long efforts to satiate Christ’s thirst for souls was not enough to convince her that she would have earned a place in heaven.
If Mother Teresa could not be certain of her fate before death, who could? That simple sentence sums up the immorality that emanates from a religious doctrine that at its core leads to a spiritual poverty that is far more terrifying than material poverty could ever produce. If Pope Benedict XVI’s solution is “real reform . . . [and] is interior and spiritual, not external and structural,” then he might take seriously what “Mother Theresa, who was once asked what the first thing to change in the church would be, her famous reply was, ‘You and me.’”
Of course, what she meant is open to interpretation. I think she was suggesting that you and I are the first responders to change in our collective spiritual lives.
Until we accept what Jesus—and other masters—said, dozens of times . . . to “go within to realize our spiritual selves”, we will be like busy bees that have lost their compasses. The unfortunate reality is that Mother Teresa was denied that vital piece of wisdom by the RCC when it crushed the Gnostics who were teaching what Mother Teresa would have benefited from so dearly. Now we, who are citizens of humanity, have available to us an authentic natural law which, if understood and applied, will provide a foundation for universal human rights.
Thank you Mr. Allen for an
Thank you Mr. Allen for an informative piece that even your harshest critics here in the comment boxes should find even-handed journalism. True, you don't cheer lead for reforms, but that's not the job of a reporter. Speaking as an Anglican I accept this Pope for what and who he is, and so I can't get disappointed on the ecumenical front. I know that men in their 80's are not likely (absent dementia)to make 180 degree turns. That he sees Anglicans and Lutherans as potential allies against both secularism and evangelical fundamentalism is, for lack of a better word, interesting. Personally I doubt it will occur, since we mainline types seem to have left our crusading spirit back in the 60's.
Come see what the prophets
Come see what the prophets wrote about this brand of religion.
http://www.yahweh.com
A temptation in the local
A temptation in the local church is to yield to the power of wealth. A priest takes a real chance when he brings up certain topics in a wealthy parish, and so his is complicit in his silence.
And the Right Wing, with its wealth, pours the money into Rome. Odd how Rome suddenly sees things their way.
Webster's defines ecumenical
Webster's defines ecumenical as...promoting or tending towards worldwide Christian unity or cooperation...well shucks,folks!We Christians who,as the pope said,and I quote:..."Are engaged in that form of Christianity with little institutional depth,little rationality,and even less dogmatic content or stability..." (Tell the "separated brethren"how you really feel!!)-We just won't fall in line,will we? I the real question,the only question,is this:Given this pope's obvious scorn and contempt for Protestants,his "ecunemical"point is...what? What sane person would be interested in the pope's safe "god"? Dull.Boring.Manageable. And above all,"rational"Really,catholics?Really? Frankly,the pope's god sounds like the one the Pharisees and the so-called"health-and-wealth"preachers like:Small,pliable,and under the thumb of,dare I say it? "Tradition"!! I won't presume to speak for all my beloved "separated brethen"(And sisters!)But the God I adore and humbly serve,the True and Living God of Holy Writ who revealed Himself in Our Lord And Saviour Jesus Christ,doesn't remotely resemble the man-made "god"of papal ecumenicism.No;my God is Amighty,Everlasting,Glorious,Omnipotent,Omniscient,Omnipresent,Awesome,endlessly loving,compassionate,patient,tender,etc,etc,etc...I could go on and on(and on!),but I'm sure my point is made.So,in closing,my catholic friends,let me be brutally frank:We Protestants don't now nor ever will believe or accept that the True God lives in the Vatican,and your pope in not in charge of Him.The God and Father of all His children born of Him Through faith in the Risen Christ lives in the hearts of all His Blood-Bought saints,and the True Church is built on the True Rock,its True and only Head,Jesus the Church.Deal with it,Benedict.
John L. Allen's reporting is
John L. Allen's reporting is respectul, using appropriate language and to the point. His humour does not hurt; at the same time his style is light and enlightening.
John, thank you and keep it up!
The best speech was delivered
The best speech was delivered by the German Pesident Christian Wulff:
"Church and State are rightfully separate here in Germany. But the life of the Church is not a parallel society. The Church lives at the heart of this society, at the heart of this world, the heart of this era.
This is why it is also challenged with new issues time and again: How compassionately will it treat points of rupture in the lives of individuals? How will it approach points of rupture in its own history or the wrongdoing of members of its clergy? What are the respective roles of laypeople and clergy, women and men? What is the Church doing to overcome the split into Catholic, Protestant and Orthodox?"
source:
http://www.bundespraesident.de/SharedDocs/Reden/DE/Christian-Wulff/Ueber...
"In the address in the
"In the address in the Freiburg Concert House, Benedict called upon the church to embrace “worldly poverty,” so that her “missionary witness shines more brightly.” He even went so far as to suggest that historically, secularization has been an agent of reform, because it has liberated the church from “material and political burdens and privileges."
We should start here in the USA with the Catholic Schools.
A “preferential option for the poor” should be maintained in our Catholic
Schools. If we find that we cannot afford to keep our schools open to the
poor, the schools should be closed and the resources used for something else
which can be kept open to the poor. We cannot allow our Church to become a
church primarily for the middle-class and rich while throwing a bone to the
poor. The priority should be given to the poor even if we have to let the
middle-class and rich fend for themselves.
Practically speaking, the Catholic Schools must close and the resources
used for “Confraternity of Christian Doctrine” and other programs which can
be kept open to the poor. Remember, the Church managed without Catholic
Schools for centuries. We can get along without them today. The essential
factor is to cultivate enough Faith to act in the Gospel Tradition, namely,
THE POOR GET PRIORITY. The rich and middle-class are welcome too. But the
poor come first. (William Horan — w.horan@comcast.net.)
I have quite a different take
I have quite a different take on the matter of Catholic Schools. I think they have already collapsed the number of schools in the process of closing parishes and combining schools to boost enrollment, deal with aged buildings needing huge amount of money to remain in some - and usually rather poor - repair, reduce overhead, and so on. But the Catholic school systems in this country must be retained, for the poor and everyone elase. You don't over-favor the poor at the expense of the non-poor, because all are children of God and followers of Jesus. So your logic seems flawed and based mostly on business management concepts and not enough on Catholic social teaching. I also think that many religious orders who have left education as its primary charism should return to it. It is where the greatest number of vocations in the U.S. and Europe were developed: not that it will ever be what it was (and thankfully so, as there are so many other religious lifestyles/options to follow). And I also believe the complete lack of habits of some form among many vowed communities has made it impossible for many to see this form of witness to the life of Christ (I am not advocating for the old forms of habit here, but some clearly identifiable form of dress for vowed religious). So I am hopeful that our schools will be enriched and strengthened in many ways and that we support them with our talents and resources.
"Without belief in some form
"Without belief in some form of natural law, he argued, there’s no foundation for universal human rights." Anchoring one's belief in Jesus is not enough, is that it?
Anchoring one's belief in
Anchoring one's belief in Jesus embraces rather than excludes the use of reason and the belief in natural law. Jesus requires us to seek after the truth (John 8:32).This accords with what Benedict stated in the Reichstag.
That "truth" is Jesus..the
That "truth" is Jesus..the Way, the TRUTH, and the Light. In ascertaining what the TRUTH is, remember it is not necessarily found by listening to the self-appointed defenders of the "magisterium". These radicals and hate-filled rightists attempt to punish others they see as failing THEIR test of "orthodoxy". Turning orthodoxy like a spigot. Turned on and off by ambitious Vatican technocrats when it suits THEIR purposes.
Or crypto-fascists with a paranoid political agenda of fear, race-baiting and anti-semitism hiding behind the skirts of groups such as the SSPX, Sedevacantists, the Opus Dei, and other supposedly Catholic front groups. Nor is it selectively choosing what sections of the Second Vatican Council they'll accept as the authentic teaching of the Church,but dismissing other teachings or disciplinary actions because, oh well, the Council isn't "infallible". I'm not bound by them. I'm free to accept what I wish and reject whatever is disagreeable to me.
The Truth is vested in the Church because of the Paraclete's eternal presence, like the Pillar of Fire in the Old Testament guiding the children of Israel across the desert by night, the abiding Shekinah. An warm and comforting presence as expounded in Holy Scripture and the eastern and western Fathers. Those who are witnesses to Jesus words and actions.
It is the apostles, disciples, the fathers, eastern and western, who have received the deposit of faith and have passed it on to us as a precious heirloom. For all hear and to come in the Church built to last until the end of time. If you see it as a contrivance or a convenience manipulated for selfish and self-serving reasons to enhance power and prestige, you are looking straight into the face of the Evil One, the Devil's craft and handiwork to be sure. Be it done in the disguise of Pope or cardinal, it makes no difference. Satan is a clever quick-change artist and always has been.
archangel I find the kudos re
archangel
I find the kudos re what Pope B had to say a little puzzling. What he said has been said by ethicists, philosophers, humanitarians, peace prize winners and literally at least a billion righteous people for decades and decades now. I like that he cares. And his words are the words of many many others who have gone before him.
"As George Weigel recently
"As George Weigel recently put it, he seems 'the world’s premier adult.'"
This is a good opportunity to contrast Mr. Weigel's values with Jesus's. Matthew, for example, reports Jesus as saying, "I assure you, unless you change and become like little children, you will not enter the kingdom of God. Whoever makes himself lowly, becoming like this child, is of greatest importance in that heavenly reign."
Post new comment