The Independent News Source
NCR on Kindle - NCR classifieds - YouTube - Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
Printer-friendly version
PDF versionA Vatican lion who defied conservative/liberal labels
by John L Allen Jr on Sep. 03, 2010
Archbishop Agostino MarchettoGenerally speaking, the Vatican is an environment that doesn't exactly encourage individuality. Officials typically move in the shadows, subjecting their own styles and passions to the corporate interests of the Holy See. When you find a personality that shines through even here, therefore, you know you’ve got a live wire.
For the last decade, that’s unquestionably been the case with Archbishop Agostino Marchetto, who stepped down on Wednesday as Secretary of the Pontifical Council for Pastoral Care of Migrants and Itinerant Peoples, a position he had held since November 2001.
Marchetto is a fascinating guy for many reasons, but here’s my favorite: He’s a living embodiment of the point that whether the Catholic church seems “liberal” or “conservative” often depends on what question you’re asking.
Prior to taking up his Vatican gig, Marchetto was a hero to many conservatives as the author of a history of the Second Vatican Council (1962-65) that challenged progressive interpretations of Vatican II. Over the last decade, however, Marchetto has often been a thorn in the side of the same crowd, and a hero to peace-and-justice liberals, because of his outspoken defense of immigrant rights.
Most recently, Marchetto bitterly criticized the expulsions of hundreds of Roma people by the French government of Nicolas Sarkozy, insisting that guilt is always individual, never collective, and that “one cannot take an entire group of people and kick them out.”
Those comments earned Marchetto the nickname “the Gypsy Bishop.”
(As a footnote, Marchetto also told a French news agency on August 26 that “when there are expulsions and suffering, I can’t take any pleasure in the suffering of these people, in particular when it’s a case of weak and poor people who are persecuted, who are victims of a ‘holocaust.’” Italian newspapers played that up as the Vatican comparing the French crackdown on Gypsies to the Holocaust, which brought criticism from around the world, including from Holocaust survivor Elie Weisel. Afterwards, Marchetto insisted that’s not what he meant – his point, he said, was that persecution of any sort has to be of concern.)
That was hardly his first rodeo in terms of kicking up a media storm.
Back in 2009, Marchetto criticized the Italian government under conservative Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi for a deal with Libya that allows the Italian navy to intercept migrants at sea and ship them back to Tripoli, which drew all sorts of complaints from conservative politicians and praise from the United Nations’ agency for refugees.
In the same year he came out swinging against a new immigration law in Italy, calling criminalization of clandestine movement the law’s “original sin.” On that occasion, the Vatican felt forced to clarify that it hadn’t taken an official position on the measure.
For sure, Marchetto has always has a gift for sound-bites.
When the 2006 World Cup took place in Germany, Marchetto issued a warning that the event might generate a boom in human trafficking for prostitution, telling reporters: “To use the language of soccer, I believe some ‘red cards’ need to be assigned to this industry, to its clients and to the public authorities who host the event.”
In 2007, Marchetto again garnered headlines around the world when he charged that homelessness is a “global pandemic” which deserves the same sort of aggressive response as HIV/AIDS.
When word of Marchetto’s resignation began to make the rounds in Rome, some took it as punishment for being a “loose cannon,” with his comments on the French expulsions representing the straw that broke the camel’s back. Marchetto, however, said his resignation was in the works a year ago, well before the current contretemps broke out. He’s taking advantage, he said, of a traditional prerogative of papal nuncios to resign at 70 rather than the usual age of 75. (At earlier points in his career, Marchetto served as Apostolic Nuncio to Madagascar and Mauritius, and to Tanzania.)
Privately, Marchetto has a reputation as hard-charging and tough, which could make him an ambivalent figure, especially for those who worked under him. Yet he was also a favorite not only among reporters, but also diplomats, politicians, activists, scholars, and other Vatican outsiders, for whom he always had an “open door” policy.
Marchetto told reporters this week that he plans now to return to his scholarly work on Vatican II, “a subject I love and that’s so important for the church.”
The next time the world hears from Marchetto, therefore, he may seem to have returned to his “conservative” roots, having passed for the better part of a decade as a social justice “liberal” – all the while remaining the same guy.
Mr. Allen, when the time
Mr. Allen, when the time comes please tell us what sort of person is chosen to replace Abp. Marchetto in this post.
God bless Archbishop
God bless Archbishop Marchetto! Maybe he isn't pleasing everybody, but I'm sure he's pleasing God; and what else matters?
It's not just "my Jesus and
It's not just "my Jesus and me."
"And the king will say to them in reply, 'Amen, I say to you, whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me.'" (Mt 25:40)
In this case I have to side
In this case I have to side with Cardinal Marchetto rather than Elie Wiesel. Perhaps Mr. Wiesel forgets that the Roma (Gypsies) were one group to be extinguished along with Jews and the disabled during those times. The term "holocaust" is not and never should be understood univocally, only applying to Jews. Granted the PM of France isn't Hitler and "getting rid" of Roma (Gypsies)hasn't escalated to systematic slaughter it certainly does smack of the same type of bias as anti-semitism. Is it not possible to use "holocaust" in a metaphorical sense when serious issues call for it? Was not the Rwandan debacle a type of "holocaust"? How do we truly describe like kinds of deliberate "getting rid" of the other, whoever that may be?
Regarding the word
Regarding the word "Holocaust", it has meant the "genocide of large groups of people" since the 18th century. Terming expulsion of a race, no matter how deplorable the act of corporate punishment might be, seems to trivialize the term.
Ironically for a member of the Roman Catholic Curia to condemn corporate guilt of a people when corporate guilt is part of Catholic theology. Not saying that I like the idea of mass deportations based on race, I just found it ironic.
Why is there such a
Why is there such a stereotype that a "traditional" leaning Catholic somehow cares not for social justice issues? My experience in my small diocese is that they are just as interested in social justice issues as liturgically progressive Catholics. I know through the parties involved that one local priest who is often derided for being liturgically traditional offered to physically dig the small grave for a family who lost their baby and could not afford the cemetery fee. This priest did his pastoral work quietly and without trumpets. Please drop the stereotype it is patently unfair.
So, when he obviously and in
So, when he obviously and in those exact words called the expulsion of the Roma a holocaust, how was he not comparing the event to the holocaust?
Why is it that these articles
Why is it that these articles are written in terms of so many buddyish cliches....'comes out swinging....' and so on? Can't we use normal language? 'Supports' is just shorter and better, for example....Why does the writer MAINLY assess this cleric in terms of MEDIA REACTIONS? (he 'garnered' praise/criticism for this or that....Is God listening to the media? Aren't they still firmly focused on pleasing their advertisers, these days? Have they stopped selling column space and advertorials?) Isn't there a reality completely apart from media reactions... which are a rather false terrain in themselves? And did Fr. Marchetto say anything about the ruthless expulsion from France of black Africans, particularly of West Africans, recently? He probably did.(After some very ruthless expulsions in the 1990's.) And why do we merely read that he WARNED authorities of likely sex trafficking during a World Cup? Couldn't we read some facts about how much this really DOES happen?These facts should speak even louder than his warnings about them...and not be reported as if they were a priest's OPINIONS about possible events. Yes, right there in 'civilized' Western Europe, these things happen.....Why is so-called Catholic news about a very active and committed cleric, reported sycophantically in mere terms of what he SAID (he pinpointed real 'facts', which are actually independent of what he said). Then again, the reviewer turns to reporting what the MEDIA thought about what Marchetto said. This isn't reporting really, at all. These media opinions are largely sophistries and create false-fact 'overloads', which the media repeatedly generates about itself, by its own navel-gazing.
GOSH! Somewhere, somehow, there could be some analysis and REAL responses to this amazing man.....And wait, if almost all 'other' Vatican appointees are faceless, colorless cliches, (this is a tired cliche in itself), where did Pope Benedict 16 spring from?
What we need on the issue of
What we need on the issue of immigration both legal & illegal is some common sense. I would like someone to direct me to some social teaching of the Catholic Church which implies that people actually have a right to migrate from their own country. This would imply that other countries have an obligation to take them in. Immigration is a two way street; it requires those who desire emigration & a country willing to take them.
A country isn't going to take migrants in unless it needs the extra population. Of course the USA is the exception to that rule! We have no real need for immigrants here so why do we keep taking them in? It is time to end all immigration, at least until we have completely assimilated those who are already here & they start speaking our language which is not Spanish the last time I checked!
The desire to migrate is understandable in terms of seeking a better life. But there is no right to a better life. On what planet does that exist? The answer to the problem of migrants is to have economic development in the countries they wish to leave.
One can make a moral argument that those who desperately need employment may under the survival principle illegally move into another country to find employment. Even though their action is illegal, it would not be immoral. This is probably true of some of our own illegals, so the US should consider having programs where people may work here without becoming citizens. I would favor that.
Post new comment