Posted on

80. “Sin María, El Corazón queda Huérfano”

24 DE MAYO DE 2014

La devoción mariana de Francisco es uno de los signos que definen su espiritualidad. Desde sus primeros actos como Papa hasta sus discursos y prácticas diarias, la teología mariana tradicional es básica para su cosmovisión católica.

A los oídos evangélicos su lenguaje puede parecer, a veces, centrado en Cristo y orientado a la misión, pero estos énfasis del Evangelio aparentes están siempre orgánicamente relacionados con un fuerte marianismo que envuelve la narrativa y la experiencia religiosa del Papa. El último ejemplo de su profundo marianismo sucedió en un encuentro con los seminaristas en Roma el pasado 13 de mayo. Al contestar sus preguntas sobre varios temas, el Papa hizo algunos comentarios interesantes sobre el marco mariano que subyace en su teología de la vida cristiana.

BAJO EL MANTO DE LA SANTA MADRE DE DIOS
Comentando acerca de la necesidad de vigilancia en tiempos de confusión personal, Francisco evoca el consejo de los Padres Rusos de ponerse “bajo el manto de la Santa Madre de Dios”. Esta protección mariana, recuerda el Papa, forma también parte de la liturgia por la cual el creyente declara encontrar refugio bajo el  “presidium”  (refugio) de María:  “sub tuum presidium configimus, Sancta Dei Genitrix”  (bajo tu protección nos refugiamos, santa Madre de Dios). De este modo, no rezar a María en tiempos de dificultad, para un sacerdote es como ser “huérfano”.

La primera cosa que un niño hace cuando está afligido es buscar a su madre, y lo mismo debería suceder en el reino espiritual. La obra mediadora de Jesucristo y su total comprensión de nuestras necesidades (el punto central de Hebreos 1-2 y 4:14-16) aquí se pasa por alto totalmente y a su vez es subsumido bajo la protección de María quien es la madre que cuida a los que solicitan ayuda. Mientras el salmista puede clamar “¡Confiad siempre en El! ¡Habladle en oración con toda confianza! ¡Dios es nuestro refugio! (Salmo 62:8), el consejo de Francisco es buscar el “manto” de María.

Entonces el Papa continúa subrayando el vínculo que hay entre la maternidad de María y la maternidad de la Iglesia. Según él, a aquellos que tienen una “buena relación” con María se les ayudará a tener una “buena relación” con la Iglesia e incluso con su propia alma. Las tres tienen un ”elemento femenino” y los conecta de una forma transitiva y maternal. De nuevo hay un enérgico énfasis en la maternidad que corre a través de la cosmovisión mariológica. Los que no tienen una buena relación con María (suponiendo que esto signifique rezarle, confiar en ella y pedir su ayuda) son como “huérfanos”.

La Biblia, no obstante, enseña que una buena relación con la Iglesia es posible sólo mediante la cabeza de la Iglesia, o sea Jesucristo, y esto se produce mediante el Espíritu Santo (1 Corintios 12). Francisco, por otra parte, tiene una manera “maternal” de conseguir esta relación correcta.

¡LA MADRE O LA SUEGRA!
En este momento el Papa recuerda un episodio que le ocurrió hace treinta años cuando visitó a una familia en el Norte de Europa. Los miembros de esta familia eran católicos practicantes y estaban llenos de entusiasmo por Cristo (¿quizás influenciados por la cultura protestante de su comarca?). En una conversación dijeron: “Hemos descubierto a Cristo y, gracias a Dios, hemos pasado la etapa de la Madonna. Ya no la necesitamos”. “No”, respondió Bergoglio entristecido: “Esto no es una fe madura. Olvidar a la madre es siempre una mala cosa, no una señal de madurez”. Otra vez, surge la pregunta: encontrar a Cristo y sólo a El ¿es un paso hacia la madurez cristiana o es alejarse de la misma?

El último comentario concerniente a esta cuestión parece más bien una broma chistosa. Al terminar su reflexión mariana, Francisco concluye diciendo: “Si tú no quieres a María como una madre, ¡se convertirá en tu suegra!” Una manera curiosa de expandir aún más la metáfora de la maternidad en direcciones no bíblicas.

El caso es que el Papa Francisco cree que una fe libre de mariología o incluso con una mariología ligera es como una criatura huérfana y es también una fe inmadura. La verdadera cuestión es si una fe centrada en Cristo y orientada hacia la misión debería concentrarse en Cristo en lugar de entremezclar el Evangelio con varias ideas maternales que no hacen más que oscurecerlo.

Posted on

80. “Without Mary the Heart is an Orphan”. Another Instance of Francis’ Marianism

May 16th, 2014

Francis’ Marian devotion is one of the defining marks of his spirituality. From his very first acts as Pope to his daily speeches and practices, traditional Marian theology is basic to his Catholic worldview. To evangelical ears his language may at times seem Christ-centered and mission-oriented, but these apparent gospel emphases are always organically related to a strong Marianism that envelops the Pope’s religious narrative and experience. The latest example of his profound Marianism occurred in a meeting with the seminarians in Rome on May 13th. In answering their questions on various topics, the Pope made some interesting comments on the Marian framework that undergirds his theology of the Christian life.

Under the Mantle of the Holy Mother of God

Commenting on the need for vigilance in times of personal turmoil, Francis evokes the counsel of the Russian Fathers to run “under the mantle of the Holy Mother of God”. This Marian protection – the Pope recalls – is also part of the liturgy whereby the faithful declare to find refuge under the “presidium” (haven) of Mary: “sub tuum presidium confugimus, Sancta Dei Genitrix”. So, for a priest not to pray to Mary in times of difficulty is for him to be like an “orphan”. When in trouble the first thing a child does is look for his mother, so too should it happen in the spiritual realm. The mediatorial work of Jesus Christ and his total understanding of our needs (the whole point of Hebrews 1-2 and 4:14-16) is here totally overlooked and is instead subsumed under the protection of Mary who is the caring mother of those seeking help. Whereas the Psalmist can cry “For God alone, o my soul, wait in silence, for my hope is from Him” (Psalm 62:8), Francis’ advice is to seek the “mantle” of Mary.

The Pope then goes on to underline the link between the motherhood of Mary and the motherhood of the Church. According to him, those who have a “good relationship” with Mary will be helped to have a “good relationship” with the Church and even with their own souls. All three have a “feminine element” which connects them in a transitive and motherly way. Again there is strong emphasis on motherhood that runs through the Mariological worldview. Those who do not have a good relationship with Mary (assuming that this means praying to her, trusting her and seeking her help) are like “orphans”. The Bible, however, teaches that a good relationship with the Church is made possible only through the head of the Church, that is Jesus Christ, and this comes through the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 12). Francis, on the other hand, has a “motherly” way of getting that relationship right.

Either Mother or Mother-in-Law!

At this point the Pope recalls an episode that happened to him while visiting a family in Northern Europe thirty years ago. The members of the family were practicing Catholics and full of enthusiasm for Christ (perhaps influenced by the Protestant culture of their region?). In a conversation they said: “We have discovered Christ and – thank God – we have passed the stage of Madonna. We don’t need her any longer”. “No”, replied the saddened Bergoglio: “This is not a mature faith. Forgetting the mother is always a bad thing, not a sign of maturity”. Again, the question arises: is finding Christ and him alone a step towards or away from Christian maturity?

The last comment concerning this question seems more like a humorous joke. In wrapping up his Marian reflection, Francis concludes by saying “If you don’t want Mary as a mother, she will become your mother-in-law!” An intriguing way of further expanding the motherhood metaphor in non biblical directions.  

The point is that pope Francis believes that a Mariologically-free or even Mariologically-light faith is an orphan-like and immature faith. The real question is whether or not a Christ-centered and mission-oriented faith should focus on Christ instead of intermingling the Gospel with various motherhood ideas that obscure it.

Posted on

79. Peter Didn’t Have a Bank, Did He?

April 15th, 2014

“Peter didn’t have a bank, did he?” Shortly after his election Pope Francis asked this rhetorical question. Peter did not have a bank, of course, but the Vatican does have a bank, and it’s called the Institute for the Works of Religion (Istituto di Opere Religiose, IOR). Its operations have been well known by the public for its record of financial scandals over the last thirty years, often exchanging the “works of religion” for reckless banking. The peak of mismanagement and distrust was reached during Pope Benedict XVI’s reign and was certainly one factor that contributed to his resignation. Pope Francis called for an investigation and formed a commission to help him make decisions concerning the future of IOR.  

The Vatican Keeps the Bank

Francis has been working hard to bring a breath of fresh air both inside and outside the Vatican walls. In many ways he is a Pope who is trying to renew the system from the inside out by giving a personal example of a sober lifestyle full of religious enthusiasm. His statement about Peter and the bank raised some expectations that he would also touch on significant structural changes as far as the institutions of the Vatican are concerned. Some commentators went as far as saying that the Pope was ready to shut the IOR down, thus opening a season of disestablishment of the political adds-on at the center of the Catholic Church.

Last week the decision was finally announced: the Pope confirms “the importance of the IOR’s mission for the good of the Catholic Church, the Holy See and the Vatican City State”. In other words, the bank will continue to exist as is, but with more transparent policies, all while its banking profile remains untouched. For all that Francis is changing, the financial system of the Vatican will not change. Peter did not have a bank, but Popes do, and despite of all his “missional” emphases Francis is no different than his predecessors.

The Thick “Hardware” of the Vatican

What is becoming more and more apparent is that Francis is focusing on the “attitude” of the Church, but he is hardly interested in revising the basic “structure” of the Vatican. His remarks on the outgoing “mission” of the Church revolve around the “operative system” of the Church but leave its “hardware” as it stands. The bank is only one piece of a much larger picture. The Vatican is a state and the Pope is a political leader. The Vatican has a territory, an army, a diplomatic body, civil and penal courts, a prison, and a bank. It issues passports and participates in the international political scene as a sovereign state. The Roman Catholic Church is a church which operates with a state as its center. Its two-sided face is both religious and political.

The political “hardware” exchanges the Church with a political body trusting in man’s protection, rather than encouraging God’s people to serve God’s mission in God’s way. The usual justifications for the “hardware” of the Vatican are that it is the result of its long history and it helps to serve the mission of the Church. These are of course pragmatic reasons rather than biblical ones. Moreover, these justifications have caused the church to become something that goes ways beyond the way Jesus wanted the church to be. “Peter did not have a bank, did he?” was a promising start. In fact, the church does not need to own a bank nor did Jesus ever say or even suggest that the church is supposed to be a political state at heart. Francis’ subsequent reinforcement of the IOR shows that in the system as it stands the reason of state prevails over biblical principles, even for a “revolutionary” Pope.

Posted on

79. Pedro no tenía ningún banco, ¿verdad?

14 DE ABRIL DE 2014

“Pedro no tenía ningún banco, ¿verdad?” Poco después de su elección el Papa Francisco hizo esta pregunta retórica. Pedro no tenía ningún banco, por supuesto, pero el Vaticano sí que tiene uno, el llamado Instituto para las Obras de Religión (Istituto di Opere Religiose, IOR). Sus operaciones son bien conocidas por el público debido a su récord de escándalos financieros durante los últimos treinta años, intercambiando con frecuencia las “obras de religión” por obras bancarias temerarias. La cima de la mala gestión y la desconfianza se alcanzó durante el reinado del Papa Benedicto XVI e, indudablemente fue uno de los factores que contribuyó a su dimisión. El Papa Francisco solicitó una investigación y formó una comisión para que le ayudara a tomar las decisiones concernientes al futuro del IOR.

El Vaticano mantiene el Banco
Francisco ha trabajado duro para llevar un soplo de aire fresco tanto dentro como fuera de los muros del Vaticano. En muchos aspectos es un Papa que está intentando renovar el sistema desde dentro hacia fuera dando ejemplo personal de un estilo de vida sobrio lleno de entusiasmo religioso. Su declaración acerca de Pedro y el banco suscitó ciertas expectativas en el sentido de que también haría significativos cambios estructurales en lo que se refiere a las instituciones del Vaticano. Algunos comentaristas llegaron a decir que el Papa estaba dispuesto a cerrar el IOR, empezando así una etapa de derogación de la expansión política en el centro de la Iglesia Católica.

Hace dos semanas se anunció por fin la decisión: el Papa confirma “la importancia de la misión del IOR para el bien de la Iglesia Católica, la Santa Sede y la Ciudad del Vaticano”. En otras palabras, el banco continuará existiendo tal como es, pero con una política más transparente, todo ello mientras el perfil bancario se mantiene intacto. Con todo lo que Francisco está cambiando, el sistema financiero del Vaticano no variará. Pedro no tenía un banco, pero los Papas sí, y pese a todos sus énfasis “misionales” Francisco no es diferente de sus predecesores.

 El espeso “hardware” del Vaticano
Lo que es cada vez más evidente es que Francisco se está centrando en la “actitud” de la Iglesia, pero apenas se interesa en la revisión de la “estructura” fundamental del Vaticano. Sus observaciones sobre la “misión” abierta de la Iglesia giran en torno al “sistema operativo” de la Iglesia pero dejan su “hardware” tal y como está. El banco es únicamente una pieza de un cuadro mucho más grande. El Vaticano es un estado y el Papa es un líder político. El Vaticano tiene un territorio, un ejército, un cuerpo diplomático, tribunales civiles y penales, una cárcel y un banco. Expide pasaportes y participa en la escena política internacional como un estado soberano. La Iglesia Católico Romana es una iglesia que opera con un estado como su centro. Su doble cara es a la vez religiosa y política.

El “hardware” político intercambia la Iglesia con un cuerpo político que confía en la protección del hombre, en lugar de alentar al pueblo de Dios a servir a la misión de Dios en el camino de Dios. Las justificaciones habituales que se dan para razonar el “hardware” del Vaticano son que se trata del resultado de su larga historia y que ayuda a servir a la misión de la Iglesia. Estas son, claro está, defensas más pragmáticas que bíblicas. Además, estas excusas han sido la causa de que la iglesia se convierta en algo que va más allá de la forma que Jesús quería que tuviera la iglesia. “Pedro no tenía ningún banco, ¿verdad?” fue un comienzo prometedor. En realidad, la iglesia no necesita un banco y Jesús nunca dijo, ni tan siquiera sugirió, que la iglesia debería llegar a ser, en el fondo, un estado político. El posterior fortalecimiento del IOR demuestra que en el sistema, en su forma actual, la razón de estado prevalece sobre los principios bíblicos, aun para un Papa “revolucionario”.

Posted on

78. The New Saints and Pope Francis

April 5th, 2014

On 27th April two canonizations will take place in Rome. Two Twentieth century Popes will be proclaimed “saints” by the Catholic Church. John XXIII (Angelo Roncalli 1881-1963) and John Paul II (Karol Wojtyła 1920-2005) will be included in the canon, or list, of recognized saints. According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church “by canonizing some of the faithful, i.e., by solemnly proclaiming that they practiced heroic virtue and lived in fidelity to God’s grace, the Church recognizes the power of the Spirit of holiness within her and sustains the hope of believers by proposing the saints to them as models and intercessors” (828).

John XXIII and John Paul II were the two major Popes of the last century. It was John XXIII who convened the Second Vatican Council, the most significant event in contemporary Roman Catholic history. Then it was John Paul II that re-launched Catholicism as a global player, after decades, if not centuries, of prevailing self-defensiveness. The fact that the Church is canonizing the two together on the same day communicates a clear message concerning the present Pope. In a sense Francis wants to be identified with the “pastoral” afflatus of John XXIII while at the same time following the dynamism of John Paul II.

The Pastor Pope

Perhaps the most defining mark of John XXIII was the “pastoral” tone of his pontificate. Gentle in spirit, meek in manners, approachable by the people, Roncalli was the first modern Pope to not be perceived as a king but instead as a pastor. His language was simple and his human frame was humble. By no surprise, his main achievement, i.e. Vatican II, was meant to be a “pastoral” council. John XXIII did not want a rigidly “doctrinal” church that would judge the mistakes of the world but a loving “mother” who would offer protection and understanding for all.

Francis too is perceived as a “pastoral” Pope. Unlike his predecessor, the theologian Ratzinger, Francis continues to insist on the need for a change of attitude, leaving the doctrinal outlook of the Church in the background of what he says. His main message is centered around his pastoral sensitivity. Like John XXIII, Francis wants to embrace the world as it is. He does not want to change any doctrine, but wishes to draw nearer to the world. It is clear that John XXIII’s shadow is behind Francis’ way of interpreting his pontificate.

“To” and “From” the Ends of the Earth

John Paul II, however, is a more complex figure. In his long pontificate, this Pope travelled to the ends of the earth to take a strong Catholic identity and his energetic leadership to a polarized world (East/West and North/South). From the center of Catholicism, John Paul II went to the geographical peripheries to encourage Catholic renewal everywhere. Now, with the Argentinian Francis, the Pope who comes from the ends of the world, the Church travels back to Rome to bring the enthusiasm, the energy, and the concerns of the peripheries. Francis is reversing John Paul II’s journey. The direction of the movement is different (from periphery to center) but the energy that he is investing is similar. John Paul II re-ignited the Roman catholicity inside out, Francis is stirring the Catholic “mission” outside in.  The common thread between the two is that something is moving in a significant way.

The canonizations of John XXIII and John Paul II will focus on two past Popes but they will also speak of the present Pope. The pastoral catholicity of the former and the shaking and shaping ability of the latter are marks of Pope Francis. In some important respects Francis is reflected in both of these predecessors and this event will be a further opportunity to stress this identification.