The Independent News Source
NCR on Kindle - NCR classifieds - YouTube - Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
Printer-friendly version
PDF versionHijacking or setting him free, Benedict loves Newman
by John L Allen Jr on Sep. 19, 2010
By JOHN L. ALLEN JR.
London
In the final act of his four-day trip to the United Kingdom, Benedict XVI travelled today to Birmingham to formally beatify the great English theologian and apologist Cardinal John Henry Newman, praising him as an apostle of “the vital place of revealed religion in civilized society.”
While Benedict's enthuasiam for Newman was obvious, with whom the pope shares a passion for the life of the mind, critics charged that the pontiff has tamed Newman, obscuring his critique of papal authority and his openness to change.
A crowd estimated at 65,000 braved cold and rainy weather to greet Benedict XVI in Birmingham’s Cofton Park, some arriving as early as 3:00 am when the gates to the park opened.
Newman’s life covered virtually the entire 19th century, born in 1801 and died in 1890. An Anglican convert to Catholicism in 1845, Newman remains a widely influential figure because of his vast writings, including two landmarks books: Apologia Pro Vita Sua and The Grammar of Assent.
Theologically, Newman is often seen as a hero to more liberal Catholics because of his emphasis on the development of doctrine, suggesting that church teaching can change, and on conscience, suggesting that individual Catholics may occasionally be compelled to challenge official formula.
That liberals remain an important constituency within the Catholic fold was driven home today by a poll published in Britain’s Sunday Independent, which showed that solid majorities of Catholics in the U.K. disagree with the pope on a wide range of issues, including abortion after rape and contraception.
The bold headline was, “You’re Wrong, Catholics tell Pope.”
British Catholic writer John Cornwall, whose earlier claim to fame is as the author of Hitler’s Pope, suggested in a Sept. 10 piece in the Financial Times that Newman has been “pontifically hijacked,” meaning co-opted by Benedict to suppress dissent rather than to encourage it.
Oxford church history professor Diarmaid MacCulloch, an Anglican, called this a "political beatification" by Benedict intended to advance a revisionist reading of Newman's life and legacy, playing down Newman's opposition to "papal monarchy" and his role as a pioneer of the reforms of the Second Vatican Council (1962-65).
Yet Ratzinger is no Johnny-come-lately to his fondness for Newman. He studied the Grammar of Assent in the seminary, and a fellow student at the time, Alfred Laepple, has said that for him and the young Ratzinger, “Newman was our hero.”
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.
During a workshop for American bishops in Dallas in 1991, then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger reflected at length on Newman’s legacy, arguing that Newman’s emphasis on conscience rests on a prior commitment to truth.
“Conscience is central for [Newman] because truth stands in the middle,” Ratzinger said then. “Conscience signifies the perceptible and demanding presence of the voice of truth in the subject himself.”
In that sense, Ratzinger argued, it’s a mistake to style Newman as a patron saint of dissent.
For Newman, Ratzinger argued, “A man of conscience is one who never acquires tolerance, well- being, success, public standing, and approval on the part of prevailing opinion, at the expense of truth.”
That led Ratzinger to identify two standards for a genuine sense of the role of conscience.
“First, conscience is not identical to personal wishes and taste,” he said. “Secondly, conscience cannot be reduced to social advantage, to group consensus or to the demands of political and social power.”
That, in effect, is the version of John Henry Newman whom Benedict beatified this morning. In some ways this was a classically "Ratzingerian" moment, a theologian-pope embracing and extolling another towering Catholic intellectual, rather than a devotional figure who embodies popular religiosity.
Benedict acknowledged that while Newman was one of the great personalities of Victorian-era England, “he continues today to inspire and enlighten many all over the world.”
“Firmly opposed to any reductive or utilitarian approach, he sought to achieve an educational environment in which intellectual training, moral discipline and religious commitment would come together,” Benedict said.
Benedict put special emphasis on Newman’s commitment to education, especially the need for an informed Catholic laity.
The pope quoted Newman: “I want a laity, not arrogant, not rash in speech, not disputatious, but men who know their religion, who enter into it, who know just where they stand, who know what they hold and what they do not, who know their creed so well that they can give an account of it, who know so much of history that they can defend it.”
Finally, Benedict also said that was beatifying not just a towering intellectual, but also a “priest and pastor of souls” who exercised a ministry of “warmth and humanity.”
Benedict lauded Newman’s “devoted care for the people of Birmingham during the years that he spent at the Oratory he founded, visiting the sick and the poor, comforting the bereaved, caring for those in prison.”
If additional proof of Benedict’s fondness for Newman were needed, consider this: When the pontiff was elected in April 2005, he made it clear that the pope would no longer celebrate beatification Masses in Rome. Instead, they were to be performed in the diocese by the local bishop, to underscore that a “blessed” belongs to a local church.
Over these past five years, Benedict XVI has stuck to that policy, declining to celebrate a single beatification Mass – until today. Benedict chose to make Newman his first, and potentially his only, beatification Mass, confirmation indeed that Newman is close to this theologian-pope’s heart.
Whether Benedict this morning is “hijacking” Newman, or setting free the real man beneath ideologically charged interpretations, will continue to be a matter of debate. That Benedict XVI takes Newman’s life and legacy seriously, however, is beyond any doubt.
One American footnote to this morning’s events: The miracle report which qualified Newman to become “blessed” involves Jack Sullivan, a Catholic deacon in Boston, who reported being miraculously cured of a spinal disorder after praying for Newman’s intercession. Sullivan was one of the deacons who assisted with this morning’s beatification Mass.
John Allen will be filing reports throughout the Papal visit to the U.K. Sept. 16-19. Stay tuned to NCR Today for updates.
"If a "blessed" belongs to a
"If a "blessed" belongs to a local church", why were Newman's remains removed to a different spot, which clearly would have been against his wish to be buried next to his lifelong companion? The Vatican seems to have exerted its pressure in this case.
As students once said, "Credo
As students once said, "Credo in Unum Newmanum". It was joked in some quarters, that Newman's corpse wasn't found because, as he promised, he'd rise from the dead on the third day. Perhaps, he did.
Taking nothing away from the honors of the altar to which Blessed Cardinal Newman is justly deserving, his beatification on Sunday is just one of many in a long line of political statements from recent huckster popes trying to use saint-making as a political weapon. It sure worked wonders in Mexico, but Britain will be a much harder sell. The British considered him a saint in the 19th century and didn't need a pope to come to tell them either.
With B16 back in Rome, it is back to business as usual in the Vatican and in Westminster. Life goes on despite all the oratory. Following the pomp and pageantry, civil and ecclesiastical, it's obvious it doesn't and never did have a whole lot of staying power. The billions who may have been watching usually forget what it's all about within minutes of turning off the telly, or heading back to the tubes in London.
The sad result of this Anglican Provision is the Church of Rome is going to get a flood of whining, disenchanted, uber traditional Anglo-Catholics who hate women and gays. They'll certainly be in good company with the Roman cross dressers in their lace nighties and purple leotards. All of this while Catholicism starts to lose the creme de la creme of Catholic womanhood and their supporters/benefactors to the new, revived Anglican Communion. And so the beat goes on.
As I understand it, Newman's
As I understand it, Newman's remains were never found; therefore, they could not be removed, unless of course one believes in the miraculous disintegration of both bodies due to acidic rain water, fairies in the forest, or other nonsensical mumbo jumbo. Now, I don't believe in too many fairy tales, and the complete disappearance of Newman's body, along with the body of his beloved "friend," Father Ambrose St. John, is hardly a mystery. Newman was an unusually bright man. He probably knew that one day he'd be up for canonization because he left the Church of England to join "The ONE True Church, so he probably had his body, and that of his "friend," surreptitiously whisked away to another burial place, out of the reach of the Vatican, where he could be assured that they'd both RIP! (I like that better than "Rest in Peace!") Mystery solved!
John, I am reading Cornwell's
John, I am reading Cornwell's latest book about Newman "Newman's Unquiet Grave" an excellent one thus far. But, I found a copy of his essay in my study, "The Grammar of Assent". It is an original from 1891. Think it has any value beyond the obvious good message?
Peace.
The Pope quoted Newman: "I
The Pope quoted Newman: "I want a laity, not arrogant, not rash in speech, not desputatious, but men who know their religion, who enter into into it, who know just where they stand, who know what they hold and what they do not, who know their creed so well that they can give an account of it, who know so much of history that they can defend it." There is now a segment of the laity who already demonstrate those characteristics. The problem is that the Pope and the Vatican hierarchy don't seem to be have the ability to be open enough to listen to what they are saying.
As a lay person, I want a hierarchy who have some of the same characteristics espoused by Newman, especially "not arrogant".
As a lay person, I want a
As a lay person, I want a hierarchy who have some of the same characteristics espoused by Newman, especially "not arrogant". I do too. But I think that we are both out of luck! I think that "arrogance" is a side effect after the bishops undergo that operation where a window is placed in their stomach.
Why did the hierarchy have
Why did the hierarchy have Newmans remains removed from the grave space he shared with his deceased lifelong male companion?
Fair question. The BBC
Fair question. The BBC reported there were no remains left.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/west_midlands/7652841.stm
I thought foiling the Vatican's attempt to relocate Newman to cleanse him for approved pilgrimages was surely a sign from the heavens.
This article is RUBBISH. Why
This article is RUBBISH. Why would you say that Cardinal Newman, a convert FROM Anglicanism to the Roman Catholic Church rebelled against Papal Authority and advocated change in the Church? You are wrong and completely opposite. John Henry Cardinal Newman, a Roman Catholic convert ADVOCATED continuity of traditions in the Church and opposed MODERNISM. That is why the Pop approved his beatification. You are echoing an ERRONEOUS message same of Mr. Cornwell from the Financial Times because you are ignorant of Cardinal newman's writings and personal sermons. He was a faithful Roman Catholic who opposed changed and favored True Catholic practice.
You say that Cardinal Newman
You say that Cardinal Newman "followed TRUE Catholic Practices." Was one of them living in a relationship with a life long partner, that most would interpret as being "somewhat questionable according to Catholic teachings on homosexuality?" Would another be his command to be buried with his lifelong companion, Father Ambrose St. John? I haven't heard of too many cases, in fact I haven't heard of ANY, where a priest wanted to be buried with another priest in the same casket! The inscription on his tombstone many take as his coming "Out!" gesture, after death. Wasn't it something like "Out of the shadows, into the light?"
Every beatification and
Every beatification and canonization is political. And in this case Benedict is savvy. Far from "hijacking" Newman, Benedict understands that beatifying him is stamping an imprimatur on the right kind of reformation in the Church: one that is properly rooted in the Church's traditions. Newman's best example was that of fourth century Arianism, suggesting that while bishops were in large part Arian it was the laity who clung to the orthodox faith. The Holy Father understands that a church that does not change is going to die, but he also understands that the wrong kind of change is like steering a ship without a compass. See Robert Barron's response to John Cornwall at http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Spirituality/rev-robert-barron-delivers-weekly....
Rooted in WHAT tradition?
Rooted in WHAT tradition? That is where pro-traditonalists and reformers conflict. For example, one could acturately say the Catholic Church's true tradition is to have married priests (since it always has had married priests). One could say the tradition is for the bishop to be elected by the priests and the people. One could say many things presented by so-called traditionalists are not true, original Catholic tradition, but changed in time by emperors, kings, popes and even Irish priests who gave us private confession and kneelers.
Another problem with those
Another problem with those who dissent on matters such as abortion and contraception claiming Cardinal Newman as their own is that, in the vast majority of the cases I've run across, theses disagreements are based on gut feeling, societal pressure, or a utilitarian ends-means sort of argument ("the results would be so much better if" sort of thing) rather than on straight up contemplation of revealed truth. Of those four, only the last is a valid method of arriving at binding doctrine, and I'm sure Cardinal Newman understood that.
It is also important to realize that the word conscience, as used by Catholics, is not merely that gut feeling of what we think is right.
I have admired John Henry
I have admired John Henry Cardinal Newman for many decades, having had an undergraduate class called simply "Newman." Allen's column is both thought-provoking and fascinating. What I most remember about the English scholar is what I learned as an undergrad. Newman himself wrote that he was too Roman for England and too English for Rome. He was the ultimate 19th Century person, balancing the Old World and the New. I am glad that he was beatified in England. He would have thought that fitting.
Although it may not be true
Although it may not be true that the Pope didn't hijack Newman, you threw me in concluding an ideological polarity between hijacking and liberation of "the real man". Until that point in the article I thought I was reading a newsy recounting of British popular views coupled with anecdotes illustrating a history of Benedict's personal understanding of Newman.
Other mental blocks arose because of the anecdotes I think I was supposed to understand as Benedict's "side" of a "debate." 1)The Karl Ratzinger of seminary days and expert at Vatican II isn't the same person as Benedict in 2010. That early Ratzinger isn't even the curial Karl Ratzinger in 1991 up to 2005. So what that Newman was his hero for lo! all these years. For instance, St. Paul has been my hero since I was in high school but today I see, quote and understand him very differently; I have 60 more years of living & experience under my belt. 2)How is Benedict's understanding of personal conscience any different from that of anyone attempting to live a life of ethical/moral integrity given personal/group circumstances? 3)The "informed laity" quote is priceless. Substitute "informed bishops" or "informed priesthood" in that sentence and what happens to connotations assumed? OR substitute "women" for "men" and what happens? 4)I found it absolutely mind-blowing to see that laity quote posed as one side of the "debate" coming after the two Brits' quotes on "hijacking" and "political beatification". The laity quote had to do with education/knowledge of what one believes in and the history of these. The two Brits appear to eminently possess the important qualities described: deep, deep belief and knowledge of both their "creed" and history. How, pray tell, is there a polarity here?
Finally, I do see some sort of a subtle pattern of co-option going on in both the vatican and in the USA. I first noted it with Benedict's recent Hildegarde of Bingen speeches. A few years back her actions and writings were regarded as part of a New Age culture and therefore to be shunned. Now all of a sudden she's touted as champion of those who don't want to reform ecclesiastical structures. It's hard to argue that Benedict didn't take advantage of an ecclesiatical ideological opportunity in the occasion of the beatification of Cardinal Newman even if he has admired the man throughout all his priestly life. If there's a "debate" going on, I don't think it was begun by British "liberal" catholics and Anglicans. I think they simply outed it (as, incidentally, so did you by this article) and that can only be good. Healthy debate, dialogue is the only thing that eventually will bring reconcialition. It's high time to begin.
I have NO idea what you just
I have NO idea what you just said... sorry!! :S
But another excellent article about this topic is this one by Fr. Robert Barron: http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Spirituality/rev-robert-barron-delivers-weekly...
ON CONSCIENCE: The Pope
ON CONSCIENCE: The Pope Benedict points to John Henry Newman as a model of conscience that leads to truth. However, this pope’s and Pope John Paul II’s understanding of conscience begins with professing the “truth” as defined by the Vatican, or more precisely, by its popes and then fashioning conscience simply to act upon that revealed truth.
By contrast, the Second Vatican Council gave many Catholics the understanding that conscience is the supreme rational guide and that it leads itself to the truth.
In the years after the council, Joseph Ratzinger and others clearly became worried about individual conscience as a guide and set out to define “right” conscience as only one that is “properly formed” through guidance of the church. That is one reason the new catechism was written.
Certainly, it sounds logical that if conscience is to be of value as a guide to truth, it must engage in the broadest learning process that reason can give. The church can contribute to that. No argument from me on this point.
However, in trying to understand the great importance that the Council placed on the role of conscience, I once asked what I thought was an important question in a graduate-level Catholic theology class:
Can one, after thorough study, come to a good conscience dissent from any papal or other teaching of the church? “Absolutely not,” was the answer from the professor, “Then, you would not have a properly formed conscience.”
I thought to myself: “Perhaps then, I would have no conscience at all.”
The prayers for and with the
The prayers for and with the Welsh Pilgrims to Our Lady of the Taper at the close of the Westminster Mass on Saturday morning was the sole occasion Newman would have recognized as expressing a specific Oratorian spirituality, modelled on St. Philip Neri's veneration to Mary - she was absent from most every other location except that in the calendar: Sep 19th being the anniversary of her sorrowful apparition to Maxilian and Melanie in the Alps at LaSallette in 1846 (with her hopeful message of the return of a Northern European nation to the Truth).
Ponder anew...
what the Almighty can do...
... may we ever honor the Taperbearer, Mother of the light that leads kindly!
"Benedict put special
"Benedict put special emphasis on Newman’s commitment to education, especially the need for an informed Catholic laity."
I know what Newman meant when he said this. I am not so sure I know what the Pope means when he uses it. If the Pope's practices say anything, he wants a laity informed of Church doctrine and dogma; he wants them schooled in pious ritual and rubrics. He wants them to learn that they have a place and must be obedient. I think he has a much different tack when it comes to the informed theologians who offer valid criticism of how things are done or what things are taught.
Newman embraced Darwin and could not understand why the Church as being so negative about his findings. Oh, that we might have another Newman today so that we might get rid of some of the teachings that offend intelligent, educated people and fly in the face of what God has revealed through scientific study.
For some reason, the Pope seems to think that giving Catholics a "Catholic Identity" means to return to the old pre-Vatican II identity. How sad that is. Catholic identity should be based on our sacramental life and our engagement in Jesus' mission to the world. Something that is completely possible without a return to an unintelligible Latin Mass and an ever more conservative mode of practice.
Newman's remains were moved
Newman's remains were moved according to speculation in a recent NPR article due to a rumor that he was gay. joe
WHAT REMAINS? There weren't
WHAT REMAINS? There weren't any - of him or the MAN he was buried with...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/west_midlands/7652841.stm
So WHAT's in the reliquary? Must be SECOND or even THIRD CLASS relics.
http://archive.catholicherald.co.uk/articles/a0000412.shtml
I, too, believe that Newman's
I, too, believe that Newman's remains and that of Father Ambrose St. John were removed many years before the latest grave opening, "to Avoid Bringing SCANDAL to the Church," over Newman's alleged homosexuality. The Vatican planned to beatify Newman years ago, and She has had plenty of time to surreptitiously remove both bodies. If the Vatican could bury Pope John Paul 1, without an autopsy or a scientific probe into his somewhat questionable death, and if She could successfully hide millions of dollars in Nazi gold, taken from victims of the Holocaust, why could She not have the remains of Newman and St. John completely removed, or should I say, "Miraculously," disappear?
During the time of the Second
During the time of the Second Vatican Council, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger stated:
"Over the pope as the expression of the binding claim of ecclesiastical authority, there still stands one's own conscience, which must be obeyed before all else, even against the requirement of ecclesiastical authority. This emphasis on the individual, whose conscience confronts him with a supreme and ultimate tribunal, is one which in the last resort is beyond the claim even of the official church."
I am sure John Henry Cardinal Newman would agree with Ratzinger, but I'm not sure Pope Benedict XVI would.
It's amazing how both
It's amazing how both Benedict and Newman got more and more conservative the further up the hierarchical food chain they went.
"British Catholic writer John
"British Catholic writer John Cornwall, whose earlier claim to fame is as the author of Hitler’s Pope, suggested in a Sept. 10 piece in the Financial Times that Newman has been “pontifically hijacked,” meaning co-opted by Benedict to suppress dissent rather than to encourage it.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/0e6f301c-baea-11df-9e1d-00144feab49a.html
I'm still trying to track down the SOURCE of exactly WHAT was in that reliquary.
There is an excellent article
There is an excellent article on Newman in commonweal.org. Use the search field for "Newman". The article's title begins with the word "tacking". See for yourself what the man said.
Post new comment