Posted on

92. Pablo VI, un beato para tranquilizar a los conservadores perplejos

01 DE NOVIEMBRE DE 2014
La Iglesia Católico Romana tiene otro beato, o un bienaventurado, a quien la Iglesia le reconoce la capacidad de interceder a favor de las gentes que oran en su nombre. El pasado 19 de octubre el Papa Francisco beatificó a Giovanni Battista Montini (1897-1978), que llegó a ser Pablo VI (1963-1978). Un intelectual sofisticado y reservado, bien versado en literatura francesa moderna y teología, Montini se convirtió en Papa durante el Concilio Vaticano Segundo y se le encomendó la difícil tarea de finalizar el Concilio y gestionar los turbulentos años que siguieron al mismo. Pablo VI tuvo que luchar con el “espíritu” del Concilio que para muchas personas, dentro y fuera de la Iglesia, significaba la adaptación a los cambios radicales que tuvieron lugar en la sociedad occidental durante los años sesenta. Sin ser un líder natural, Montini encarnó el drama de una iglesia que sólo había alcanzado el mundo con sus palabras optimistas de apreciación pero que también se retiraba hacia unas actitudes más cautelosas.
El Momento de la Beatificación
La beatificación de Pablo VI llega al final de un Sínodo que debatió la posibilidad de un reposicionamiento de la Iglesia Católica en los asuntos concernientes a la familia. Esta reunión de obispos discutió abiertamente la readmisión de personas divorciadas en la Eucaristía, así como también un acercamiento más positivo a las nuevas formas de familia, p.e. las uniones civiles y las relaciones homosexuales. No se tomó ninguna decisión final, pero el hecho de que se previesen e incluso se defendieran ciertos cambios por parte de algunas voces progresistas hizo que los intransigentes tradicionales teman ahora que un cambio de paradigma importante esté a punto de ocurrir. El Papa Francisco convocó el Sínodo y parecía que aprobaba estos cambios, insistiendo siempre en que la Iglesia necesita tener la mente abierta. Si bien, al mismo tiempo, no quería dar la impresión de estar completamente al lado de los que deseaban volver a discutir la valoración moral católica de las diferentes relaciones humanas.
En este punto la beatificación de Pablo VI salta a la palestra. En los círculos católicos siempre se ha representado a Pablo VI como el Papa que, con su Encíclica Humanae Vitae de 1968, se oponía a los métodos anticonceptivos y se consolidaba en la moral católica tradicional en medio de la “revolución sexual”. Es factible que Francisco supiera que el Sínodo podía abrir nuevos caminos hacia el entendimiento católico de la familia y que los conservadores se perturbaran por estos cambios. Sin embargo, quería que Pablo VI fuera beatificado al final del Sínodo para enviar el mensaje que, por una parte la Iglesia Católica puede actualizar su visión y, por la otra, honrar sus tradiciones. Es tanto una realidad viva como tradicional. Por consiguiente, el momento de la beatificación demuestra la habilidad de una institución que es tradicional sin llegar a ser tradicionalista o, por decirlo de otra manera, hace los cambios sin perder su herencia. La beatificación ha sido un mensaje tranquilizador a esta sección de la circunscripción católica que se sintió desconcertada y perpleja con el resultado del Sínodo.
El Pacto de Lausana y el Evangelii Nuntiandi
Pablo VI debería ser también recordado por un interesante paralelismo de algo que sucedió en el Movimiento Evangélico durante su pontificado. En 1974, como resultado del Congreso Internacional de Evangelización Mundial convocado por Billy Graham y organizado por John Stott, el Pacto de Lausana llamó a la iglesia a implicarse en la evangelización del mundo con el Evangelio bíblico. Hasta entonces la palabra “evangelización” y el vocabulario asociado a la misma se habían tratado con suspicacia en los círculos católico romanos debido a la utilización y a las connotaciones “protestantes”. La misión y la catequesis eran más tradicionales y fueron los términos preferidos por mucho tiempo. Es solamente después del Vaticano II que el lenguaje de la evangelización empezó a usarse.
Fue en realidad Pablo VI con su Exhortación Apostólica de 1975 Evangelii Nuntiandi, quien ayudó a la Iglesia Católica a aceptar y utilizar la palabra “evangelización”, dándole una connotación católica. Es interesante resaltar que fue después de Lausana cuando la Iglesia Católica comprendió la importancia del vocablo para su misión. Al resistirse a la relajación de la moral católica, Pablo VI captó la necesidad que tenía la Iglesia de explorar la importancia de la evangelización. Ahora el Papa Francisco habla más de la “misión” que de la “evangelización” y quiere que la Iglesia sea “una casa abierta” a todos los seres humanos, dejando a un lado las preocupaciones que desgastaron completamente a Pablo VI.
Posted on

93. Who Are We to Judge? The Synod on the New Forms of the Family

October 31st, 2014

“Whom am I to judge?” answered Pope Francis to a question on homosexuals. Who are we to judge? … seems to be the sequel of his answer by the Synod that met in mid October to discuss various critical issues about the family and the Church’s responsibility in addressing them. We are perhaps dealing with a significant development in the Roman Catholic Church, something along the line of the “aggiornamento” (i.e. update of attitudes and approaches) that took place at Vatican II and after. The pre-Synod debate chiefly concentrated on the possibility to re-admit to the Eucharist those who went through a divorce. Given the fact that, according to Roman Catholic teaching, marriage is a once and for all sacrament administered by the Church, should those who have broken marriages be given the sacrament of the Eucharist or not? The debate was polarized between progressive voices (like Cardinal Walter Kasper, for example) who favored a relaxation of the prohibition and conservative ones (like the North-American Cardinals) who opposed it. No final decision has been made yet. Next year’s second session of the Synod will make it and ultimately the Pope will promulgate it. There are tensions within the Catholic Church but the majority seems to have taken a line marked by openness towards change, not only as far as the re-admission to the Eucharist is concerned, but also towards re-positioning the Catholic Church in the much bigger discussion about the different forms of human relationships.

The Law of Graduality

The report drafted after the initial discussion (Relatio post disceptationem) contains some revolutionary statements and some significant silences. It highlights the positive value of each relationship, considered as always a good thing in itself. The Church wants to speak a word of hope to each relationship but the document refrains from passing over moral judgments on the kind of relationship that is envisaged. The report appeals to the “law of graduality”, i.e. each form of relationship is an imperfect form of good that needs to be encouraged to flourish. No distinction is made between heterosexual marriage and homosexual relationship, co-habitation and unions of various kinds. The good of a relationship is always in a “gradual” form and no relationship is totally deprived of it. Therefore, while recognizing standing and unresolved moral issues, positive words are used to describe homosexual relationships and non-married unions. This is the first time that something similar happens in a semi-official Vatican document.

The “law of graduality” allows to recognize the positive elements that exist in every situation, even in those that the Church has traditionally defined as sinful. Stress is put on “imperfect forms of good” that are present everywhere. Traditional Roman Catholic teaching has often underlined the “objective” nature of sinful acts (e.g. the adulterous and the homosexual intercourses), but the document leaves aside any reference to a black-and-white moral picture when it comes to assessing the present-day forms of relationship. Each relationship has different shades of good and this is the point the Church wants now to focus on. It is true that the final report (Relatio Synodi) moderates some of these statements and puts them more clearly in the context of the traditional teaching of the Church. The point is that the principle of the Roman catholicity (i.e. the development and widening of catholic synthesis) has been working here. A more extreme position is after mitigated and then one year is taken for the debate to go on until the final decision will come. Having said that, Pope Francis’ question “Who am I to judge?” has become the question of the majority of the Synod. It is now clear that the Pope’s “merciful” attitude has gained attention and has become wide-spread amongst the Catholic hierarchy.

The Vatican II Paradigm

Where does this feasible but not-yet official change come from? Some observers might argue that it is a capitulation to the spirit of the age that blurs any moral distinctiveness and elevates individual choices as the paramount criterion of what is good. Though there may be some truth in it this analysis is nonetheless incomplete. It was the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) that provided the tools that the Synod is now applying to the issue of sexuality and the family. Let’s see what happened then and how it impacts today’s discussion.

Before Vatican II, all non-Catholics were thought of as being heretics, schismatics or pagans. You were either in the Church or outside and against it. The Council introduced a new way of looking at non-Catholic people. While the Catholic Church retained its conviction to have access to the full sacramental salvation, other believers were considered as revolving around it depending on the distance or nearness to the center. The other religions reflected different degrees of truth and blessing and were seen in a fundamental positive way. The point is that each religion contained elements of truth that needed to be appreciated and that formed the basis for a re-discovered universal brotherhood. Vatican II abandoned the clear-cut in/out approach to embrace the principle of graduality: instead of denouncing the others’ errors, each religion became to be seen as having some good in it.

The same model is now applied to the different relationships. There is some good in a homosexual relationship although it remains distant from the ideal relationship. There is some good in a co-habitation outside of marriage although it is still irregular. There is some good in any loving relationship. It may be weak, defective, and even contradictory, but the Church wants to speak a word of understanding and hope for all. Although Pope Francis has not yet made this position official, everything that he has been saying and doing so far points to this direction. After his “Who am I to judge?”, the majority in the Synod is saying “Who are we to judge?”

Posted on

92. Paul VI, A Beatus to Reassure the Perplexed Conservatives

October 24th, 2014

The Roman Catholic Church has another beatus, or blessed one, whom the Church recognizes as having the capacity to intercede on behalf of individuals who pray in his or her name. On October 19th Pope Francis beatified Giovanni Battista Montini (1897-1978) who became Paul VI (1963-1978). A reserved and sophisticated intellectual, well versed in modern French literature and theology, Montini became Pope during the Second Vatican Council and was given the difficult task of concluding the Council and handling the turbulent years that followed. Paul VI had to wrestle with the “spirit” of the Council that for many inside and outside the Church meant an adaptation to the radical changes that Western society was going through during the Sixties. Not a natural leader, Montini embodied the drama of a Church that had just reached out to the world with its optimistic words of appreciation but had to also retreat to more cautious attitudes.

The Timing of the Beatification

Paul VI’s beatification comes at the end of a Synod that discussed the possibility of a re-positioning of the Catholic Church on matters concerning the family. This gathering of bishops openly debated the re-admission of divorced people to the Eucharist as well as a more positive approach towards new forms of family, e.g. civil unions and homosexual relationships. No final decision was made, but the fact that certain changes were envisaged and even advocated for by some progressive voices made traditional hardliners fear that a significant paradigm shift is about to occur. Pope Francis called the Synod and appeared to welcome these changes, always insisting that the Church needs to be open-minded. At the same time, though, he did not want to give the impression of entirely siding with those who want to re-discuss the Catholic moral assessment of different human relationships.

At this point the beatification of Paul VI comes to the fore. In Catholic circles Paul VI is always portrayed as the Pope who with his 1968 Encyclical Humanae Vitae opposed contraceptive methods and sticked to traditional Catholic morality in the midst of the “sexual revolution”. It is feasible that Francis knew that the Synod could have broken new ground in the Catholic understanding of the family and that conservatives would have been upset by these changes. Yet he wanted Paul VI to be beatified at the end of the Synod to send the message that, on the one hand the Catholic Church can update its vision and, on the other, honor its traditions. It is both a living and a traditional reality. Therefore the timing of the beatification demonstrates the cleverness of an institution that is traditional without becoming traditionalist or, to put it differently, that changes without losing its heritage. The beatification was a reassuring message to that section of the Catholic constituency that felt puzzled and perplexed with the outcome of the Synod.

The Lausanne Covenant and Evangelii Nuntiandi

Paul VI should also be remembered for an interesting parallel to what was happening in the Evangelical Movement during his pontificate. In 1974, as a result of the Congress on World Evangelization convened by Billy Graham and shaped by John Stott, the Lausanne Covenant called the church to be engaged in evangelizing the world with the biblical gospel. Up to that point the word “evangelization” and the vocabulary associated with it had been treated with suspicion in Roman Catholic circles due to its “protestant” usage and overtones. Mission and catechesis were more traditional and were the preferred terms for a long time.

It is only after Vatican II that the language of evangelization began to be used. It was actually Paul VI with his 1975 Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Nuntiandi that helped the Catholic Church to accept and use the word “evangelization” giving it a Catholic connotation. It is interesting that it was after Lausanne that the Catholic Church understood the importance of the term for its mission. While resisting the relaxation of Catholic morality, Paul VI caught the need for the Church to explore the significance of evangelization. Now Pope Francis speaks more about “mission” than “evangelization” and wants the Church to be “an open house” for all human beings, leaving aside the concerns that completely wore out Paul VI.

Posted on

91. Ecumenism in All Directions. Pope Francis and the Unity of the Church

October 8th, 2014

Nothing is substantially new, but everything is affirmed and lived out in a really new way. This is how Cardinal Walter Kasper, former head of the Pontifical Council for Christian Unity, summarizes Pope Francis’ approach to ecumenism. In a foreword to a book that analyses the major papal speeches and acts as far as the unity of the church is concerned (Riccardo Burigana, Un cuore solo. Papa Francesco e l’unità della chiesa, Milano: Edizioni Terra Santa, 2014), Kasper argues that from his first address after being elected to his daily words and gestures, ecumenism has been central to what Francis has been doing thus far.

As is often the case in the Roman Catholic Church, there is no substantial change in the overall doctrinal framework. The Catholic approach to ecumenism is still the same without additions or subtractions. The final goal of ecumenism is to bring the whole church cum Petro (with Peter, i.e. in fellowship with the Pope) and sub Petro (under Peter, i.e. in submission to the Pope). Having said that, emphases and attitudes do change and this Pope certainly has a distinct way of interpreting his mission as a chief promoter of the ecumenical cause.

Ecumenism of Friendship

The book reflects the on-going commitment of Pope Francis to foster his view of Christian unity. After reading it, here are some observations that can be made. His ecumenical initiatives are based more on personal contacts with leaders of different churches and organizations than on institutional channels. In performing his role the Pope does not totally depend on Vatican bureaucracy but instead retains his own sphere of initiative. This relational aspect is often underlined as the primary way to foster mutual trust and deeper relationships. In Francis’ view, theological dialogues are less important than personal acquaintances. Nothing changes as far as the long term goal of the Pope presiding over the whole church is concerned, but this is not the issue that the Pope likes to focus on. The important thing for him is to say that we are friends, brothers, sisters, already “one” in some sense.

He wants different ecumenical partners and friends to be valued, listened to, cared for, and even admired. He wants to affirm them and wants them to feel appreciated. Theological and ecclesiastical alignments are secondary. Anyone interested in what is happening with this Pope should note that the paradigm he is operating under is that of an ecumenism of friendship rather than one of convictions. The two are not opposed, but the emphasis for him lies on the former, not the latter.

In his 2013 exhortation Evangelii Gaudium, Francis made clear that time is more important than space. What he meant is that those who set their lives in long-term trajectories are better suited to achieve something than those who concentrate on the here and now. The overwhelming appreciation of the ecumenical partners and the on-going investment in personal relationships are two tracks of the ecumenical path that is consistent with this view.

Closer to All?

Another impressive mark of Pope Francis’ ecumenism is that he manages to get closer to all his ecumenical partners without making distinctions between them. He has similar words, attitudes, and approaches to Eastern Orthodox of various stripes, Liberal protestants, Anglicans, Evangelicals, Pentecostals and other kinds of Christians. Theologically speaking this is rather awkward because the closer you get to the sacramentalism and the devotions of the East, the farther away you go from the liberal agenda of most Western protestant churches, and vice versa. Furthermore as you draw nearer to the “free” church tradition of Pentecostalism you at the same time distance yourselves from the highly hierarchical and sacramental ecclesiology of both the Roman and the Eastern traditions. Not so for Pope Francis. As already pointed out, this is not his approach. He invests in relationships with all people while leaving aside theological traditions and ecclesiastical settlements. He wants to get closer to all.

A further illustration of this point is that as he draws nearer to all Christians, Pope Francis is also determined to draw nearer to all people, be they religious or secular. The same brotherly and appreciative afflatus is what marks the Pope’s attitude towards Jews, Muslims, and agnostic intellectuals. Divisive issues are left aside whereas the “brotherly” dimension is always in the foreground. The Pope is clearly pushing with the same intensity the relational side of ecumenism and inter-religious dialogue as if they were two intertwined paths to achieve the overall catholic goal: cum Petro and sub Petro.

The point is that one’s objective is to draw nearer to everyone, this means that the driving concern is not biblical truth and love that is a principled and discerning criterion but the catholicity of friendship that is much more flexible and fluid. While appreciating the friendly tone, the keeping of Christian unity cannot be a matter of friendship alone. Unity in truth is what Jesus prayed for in John 17, and unity in truth and love is what Paul wrote about in Ephesians 4.

 

Posted on

91. Ecumenismo en todas las direcciones

18 DE OCTUBRE DE 2014
Nada es sustancialmente nuevo, pero todo se concibe y se vive de una forma totalmente nueva. Así es como el Cardenal Walter Kasper, antiguo director del Consejo Pontificio para la Unidad de los Cristianos, resume el enfoque que hace el Papa Francisco del ecumenismo. En el prólogo de un libro que analiza los principales discursos y actos papales referentes a la unidad de la iglesia (Riccardo Burigana, Un cuore solo. Papa Francesco e l’unità della chiesa [Un solo corazón. El Papa Francisco y la unidad de la iglesia], Milán: Edizioni Terra Santa, 2014), Kasper sostiene que desde su primera alocución después de ser elegido hasta sus palabras y gestos cotidianos, el ecumenismo ha sido el tema central de todo lo que Francisco ha estado haciendo hasta ahora. Como ocurre a menudo en la Iglesia Católico Romana, no hay un cambio trascendente en el marco doctrinal general. La aproximación católica al ecumenismo es todavía la misma sin adiciones ni sustracciones. El objetivo final del ecumenismo es traer a toda la iglesia cum Petro (con Pedro, o sea, en comunión con el Papa) y sub Petro (bajo Pedro, es decir, con sumisión al Papa). Una vez dicho esto, los énfasis y las actitudes cambian y este Papa tiene ciertamente una manera distinta de interpretar su misión como principal promotor de la causa ecuménica.
EL ECUMENISMO DE LA AMISTAD
El libro refleja el compromiso incesante del Papa Francisco para promover su visión sobre la Unidad de los Cristianos. Después de leerlo, se pueden hacer las siguientes observaciones. Sus iniciativas ecuménicas están basadas más en contactos personales con líderes de diferentes iglesias y organizaciones que a través de los canales institucionales. En el desempeño de su papel el Papa no depende totalmente de la burocracia vaticana sino que conserva su propia esfera de iniciativa. Se subraya con frecuencia este aspecto relacional como la forma principal de fomentar la confianza mutua y lazos más estrechos. Según el punto de vista de Francisco los diálogos teológicos son menos importantes que los contactos personales. Nada cambia en lo que concierne al objetivo a largo plazo del Papa presidiendo toda la iglesia, pero este no es el asunto sobre el cual al Papa le gusta concentrarse. Lo importante para él es decir que los amigos, los hermanos, las hermanas, ya somos “uno” en cierto sentido. El quiere diferentes copartícipes y amigos ecuménicos para evaluarles, escucharles, atenderles e incluso admirarles. Quiere afianzarles y desea que se sientan apreciados. Los alineamientos eclesiásticos y teológicos son secundarios.
Cualquiera que esté interesado en lo que sucede con este Papa debería notar que el paradigma bajo el que está operando es el de un ecumenismo de amistad en lugar de uno de convicciones. Los dos no son opuestos, pero él pone el énfasis en el primero, no en el último. En su exhortación Evangelii Gaudium de 2013, Francisco dejó claro que el tiempo es más importante que el espacio. Lo que quiere decir es que aquellos que fijan en sus vidas trayectorias a largo plazo están mejor adaptados para conseguir algo que los que se concentran en el aquí y ahora. La abrumadora apreciación de los socios ecuménicos y la continua inversión en relaciones personales son dos pistas del sendero ecuménico que es coherente con esta opinión.
¿MÁS CERCA DE TODOS?
Otra marca impresionante del ecumenismo del Papa Francisco es que logra acercarse a todos sus socios ecuménicos sin hacer distinciones entre ellos. Tiene similares palabras, actitudes y aproximaciones hacia los ortodoxos orientales de varias bandas, los protestantes liberales, los anglicanos, los evangélicos, los pentecostales y otras clases de cristianos. Teológicamente hablando esto es más bien incómodo porque cuanto más se acerca uno al sacramentalismo y las devociones del Este, más lejos se va de la agenda liberal de la mayoría de las iglesias protestantes occidentales y viceversa. Además, a medida que se aproxima uno más a la “libre” tradición de la iglesia del Pentecostalismo se distancia al mismo tiempo de la eclesiología sumamente jerárquica y sacramental, tanto de las tradiciones romanas como de las orientales.
Pero no es así para el Papa Francisco. Como ya se ha señalado, este no es su enfoque. El invierte en relaciones con todo el mundo mientras deja de lado las tradiciones teológicas y los arreglos eclesiásticos. Quiere acercarse a todos. Una ilustración adicional a este punto es que mientras se aproxima a todos los cristianos, el Papa Francisco también está determinado a estar cerca de todas las gentes, ya sean religiosas o seglares. Las mismas fraternales y apreciativas inspiraciones es lo que caracteriza la actitud del Papa hacia los judíos, los musulmanes y los intelectuales agnósticos. Las cuestiones que causan división se dejan aparte, mientras que la dimensión “fraternal” está siempre en primer plano. El Papa está claramente empujando con la misma intensidad el lado relacional del ecumenismo y el diálogo inter-religioso como si ambos fueran dos caminos entrelazados para conseguir la totalidad del objetivo católico: cum Petro y sub Petro. El caso es que si el objetivo propio es acercarse a todo el mundo, esto significa que la preocupación principal no se dirige hacia el amor y la verdad bíblicos, que es el criterio de sensatez y de principios, sino a la catolicidad de amistad que es mucho más flexible y fluida. Al tiempo que reconocemos el tono simpático, el mantenimiento de la unidad de los cristianos no puede ser sólo un asunto de amistad. Unidad en la verdad es por lo que Jesús oró en Juan 17 y unidad en la verdad y el amor es sobre lo que Pablo escribió en Efesios 4.