Posted on

64. Between Trent and Aparecida. The Trajectory of Pope Francis

August 26th, 2013

Since his election Pope Francis has been impressing the public opinion with his extrovert attitudes, simple habits and charming language. The recent World Youth Day (WYD) in Brazil confirmed each of these attributes. Most people seem to admire the new “franciscan” style of the Papacy, i.e. a blend of frugal manners, emphasis on mercy, and apparent approachability. Few, however, have taken the time to deal with Francis’ theological vision that is inspiring his papacy.

The Tridentine Background …

An initial step to embarking on such a task is reading his first encyclical Lumen Fidei (July 5th, 2013), in which Francis (with Benedict XVI, who is the main drafter of the document), among other things, updates the theology of the Council of Trent. In this highly authoritative document he reiterates the doctrine of salvation by faith through sacraments and works, thus renewing the Catholic rejection of the Protestant Sola Fide, i.e. the good news that we are saved by grace alone through faith alone. The attachment to Trent and the Counter-Reformation may seem remote if not alien to Francis (although we should never forget that he belongs to the Jesuit order), but the hard theological evidence says the contrary. In the foundational doctrine of salvation, Trent is still alive and well, perhaps in the friendlier tone of Pope Bergoglio, but it is there, untouched as ever. While the outlook of the Papacy is showing signs of change, the doctrinal core of the Church of Rome has been confirmed without significant developments.

… and The Vision of Aparecida

The WYD provided another important reference point that is at the heart of Francis’ program and therefore must be considered. From Trent, in the middle of the Italian Alps, we journey to Aparecida (Brazil), “on the other side of the world”, as Francis would put it. In 2007 the Latin American Bishops met in Aparecida for their Fifth General Conference, where the then Cardinal Bergoglio was one of the main inspirers of the final document. It is a 165 page text that aptly defines Francis in terms of his theological language, pastoral emphases, and missionary agenda. Aparecida accurately depicts the theological vision of the Pope. Because of its importance we shall look at it more carefully in a future Vatican File.

For Francis, though, Aparecida is not only a foundational document, it is first and foremost a Marian shrine which was built to keep a statue of Mary that according to tradition was found in 1717 by a group of three fishermen. Since 2011, it has become the greatest Marian pilgrimage destination in the world. During the WYD week, in his speech to the Brazilian Bishops on July 27th, Francis said that “Aparecida is the interpretative key for the Church’s mission”. There is something important to be found there; something that helps in understanding what the Church is all about in terms of its mission.

In explaining the intent of his comment, the Pope went on to say that “in Aparecida God offered Brazil his own mother” and revealed “his own DNA”. The Gospel, though, is about God giving His Son to the world, but Francis here speaks of God offering his mother. This not merely a matter of theological minutiae!

According to the Pope, the lesson of Aparedica has to do with the humility of the fishermen and their zeal to tell others about their discovery. This is the “interpretative key for the Church’s mission”: humility and mission. Notice, however, that we are talking about the recovery of a statue of Mary which has become a world-famous attraction for millions of people. The Gospel is about a group of humble fishermen being called by Jesus to follow him and to tell others about Him. Francis is here talking about people who found Mary and became missionaries for her. Again, this is no small difference!

Territorial Marianism

Aparecida is the national Shrine of Our Lady of Aparecida, a Marian center which is very dear to Pope Bergoglio. Prior to WYD, in his speech there on July 24th, Francis said: “What joy I feel as I come to the house of the Mother of every Brazilian, the Shrine of our Lady of Aparecida! The day after my election as Bishop of Rome, I visited the Basilica of Saint Mary Major in Rome, in order to entrust my ministry as the Successor of Peter to Our Lady. Today I have come here to ask Mary our Mother for the success of World Youth Day and to place at her feet the life of the people of Latin America”.

Here we find some common threads of Francis’ Marianism:

–          the priority of his Marian devotion

–          his first act as Pope was a Marian act

–          his belief that the Papal office should be entrusted to Mary

–          his prayer to Mary for the success of WYD

–          his dedicating to Mary the people of Latin America.

This sentence summarizes the core of Francis’ Marianism. What is even more striking, though, is his “territorial” understanding of Aparecida. When he says that Mary is the Mother of “every Brazilian”, he is applying a “territorial” understanding of his religion, as if every Brazilian, in spite of religious pluralism that marks Brazil, is nonetheless a child of Mary. This attitude reflects how it is difficult for a Roman Catholic majority culture to accept the fact that Mary may be the mother of the Roman Catholic Brazilians, but not of those who may have a high respect for the biblical Mary without turning it into someone to be venerated.

When Pope Francis speaks extensively of “mission”, “outreach”, and “encounter with Christ” – a language that seems very Evangelical – one should be aware that the background of it all lies between Trent and Aparecida. He stands between the Counter-Reformation emphasis on a synergistic Gospel and the “missional” attitude that can be found in his thoroughgoing Marianism.

Posted on

63. Same Word, Different World. The Roman Catholic Doctrine of Regeneration

(this article appears on Credo Magazine, July 2013, pp. 63-71 and is used here with permission: www.credomag.com)

August 2nd, 2013 

The doctrine of regeneration belongs to the core of the biblical view of salvation and is a term that is shared by all Christian traditions in their respective accounts on what it means to be saved. To be regenerated by God is the act by which God himself re-creates life in a otherwise dead person. Regeneration is, therefore, the entry point of a saved life. Surveying the Biblical evidence, Packer summarizes it in this way: Regeneration “means rebirth (palingenesia): it speaks of a creative renovation wrought by the power of God”.[1] On the surface, the theological meaning of the word is pretty clear and all Christian traditions acknowledge it. The difference between them is not so much on the word itself but the theological “worlds” in which they implant the word in order to make sense of it.

A theological word is not a self-contained unit. Though it carries its own semantic weight, it is also defined by when and where it is found, the web of references which are associated with it, who is involved in enacting it as well as the practices that precede, accompany and follow it. In other words, regeneration as a word can have one meaning which is common to all, but regeneration as a doctrine may point to different theological directions depending on the way it is construed.

In what follows we will explore how Roman Catholicism understands the doctrine of regeneration especially as articulated by the 1994 Catechism of the Catholic Church.[2] This magisterial authoritative source is a thoughtful and comprehensive explanation of the Catholic faith and is the best place to come to terms with what the Roman Catholic Church believes about regeneration.

The Vocabulary of Regeneration

One way of pursuing our goal is to examine the vocabulary used by the Catechism as far as regeneration is concerned. There does not seem to be a specific and technical definition of the term, but the Catechism uses the word by associating it with other Biblical and liturgical words and expressions that contribute towards its definition. In doing so it approximately indicates the meaning of regeneration by way of connecting it to similar words.

As a life-giving event, regeneration is related to “new birth” or “re-birth” (e.g. 1213; 1270). Therefore the Catechism translates the Greek-derived word (re-generation) into the birth-related words. In another metaphorical area, regeneration is linked to the transition from darkness to light (e.g. 1250) and to the inner renewal of one’s own self and purification from sin (e.g. 1262). Moreover, regeneration is further associated with entering the kingdom of God (1263). There are Biblical references here and there to support each meaning.

What is most striking however is the relationship that the Catechism envisages between regeneration and the sacrament of baptism. More than its Biblical nuances and theological significance, it is this inherent association that ultimately defines the Roman Catholic understanding of the core of regeneration.

Sacramental Regeneration

As it is well known the Catechism is structured according to the order of the Apostles’ Creed (the profession of faith), followed by the presentation of the sacraments (the celebration of the Christian mystery), the Christian life including the ten commandments (life in Christ), and the life of prayer which is centered on the Lord’s prayer. In this overall framework, it is interesting to notice where regeneration is theologically placed and treated. It is not found in the section on the work of Christ nor in the section on the ministry of the Holy Spirit, but instead comes to the fore in the second part which deals with the sacraments of the Church. Doctrinally, then, regeneration, though organically related to the work of the Triune God, is specifically attached to the sacramental ministry of the Church. From a systematic point of view, the Roman Catholic theological map places regeneration under the rubric of the liturgy of the Church rather than in the chapter on God’s salvation.

More specifically, it is the sacrament of baptism that plays a fundamental role in bringing regeneration about. It is in the context of baptism that the Catholic doctrine of regeneration is spelt out.

 

Holy Baptism is the basis of the whole Christian life, the gateway to life in the Spirit (vitae spiritualis ianua),and the door which gives access to the other sacraments. Through Baptism we are freed from sin and reborn as sons of God; we become members of Christ, are incorporated into the Church and made sharers in her mission: “Baptism is the sacrament of regeneration through water in the word” (1213).

The final quote comes from the 1566 Roman Catechism (II, 2, 5) which was published as a result of the Council of Trent. Notice however that no Scriptural reference is given to support the doctrine, but rather it appears as the combination of different Biblical words which are give a sacramental bent. Such an absence of Biblical support is telling. Indeed, there is no Biblical evidence to support such a weighty doctrinal statement. In the Catechism, baptism is seen as the sacrament which accords freedom from sin and re-birth as children of God. As regeneration is the result of baptism and baptism is administered by the Church, it is syllogistically evident that regeneration does not happen as an act of God’s grace alone, to be received by faith alone, but as an act mediated by the sacrament of the Church who enacts its intended result.

Expanding its teaching on baptism as that which effects regeneration, the Catechism goes on to say that

This sacrament is also called “the washing of regeneration and renewal by the Holy Spirit,” for it signifies and actually brings about the birth of water and the Spirit (1215).

 

This time the language comes directly from Titus 3:5, but fails to indicate that the Biblical passage puts the “washing of regeneration” in the context of God’s goodness and loving kindness, stressing that we are not saved because of “works done by us” but out of “His own mercy”. The focus of the whole passage is God alone working out His loving plan of salvation without any contribution on man’s part nor on the church’s part – any work of any kind. In the Catechism, however, it is the sacrament that “signifies and actually brings about” regeneration. It is the act of baptism that causes the new birth to occur ex opere operato (from the work done). The emphasis has shifted from the merciful God who regenerates out of His sovereign grace to the baptizing Church who performs the sacrament of regeneration. In other words, a major shift has taken place: from the graceful act of divine salvation to the participation of the Church in the saving act, and from the free gift of God to the ecclesiastical sacrament ministered by the priest.

According to the Catechism, the time of regeneration is when baptism is administered. It is the baptized person that is regenerated and therefore enters the sacramental life of the Church in whose sacraments he/she will receive the fullness of salvation.[3] It is through baptism that the person is forgiven  from all sins (1263), made a new creature, adopted as a son of God, becomes a member of Christ, a co-heir with him, and a temple of the Holy Spirit (1265). It is in baptism that the person receives “sanctifying grace, the grace of justification” (1266)[4] and is incorporated into the Church (1267-1270). It is baptism that is the sacramental bond of the unity of Christians (1271), therefore warranting the Roman Catholic view that Christian unity is based on baptism (even though the majority of the baptized ones do not show any sign of regeneration).

The “Sacramental Economy” and Evangelical Confusion

This view of baptismal regeneration is part of the Roman Catholic view of the sacraments. The Catechism defines this theological framework as the “sacramental economy” of the Christian faith (1076). If one reads what the Catechism says about regeneration without grasping what the “sacramental economy” means, one will completely misread it. To put it succinctly, the “sacramental economy” is a view that binds God to act through the sacraments and therefore through the Church.[5] Everything that God does, He does through the sacraments. His grace comes to us through the sacraments. His salvation reaches us through the sacraments. His work impacts us through the sacraments. The problem is not the recognition of the Biblical importance of the sacraments, but their exclusivity in terms of what God can do. In the background of the sacraments, there is always the Church that administers them, having therefore a fundamental role in mediating God’s actions. The word regeneration means new birth received from God, but the world of the “sacramental economy” makes it a Church affair because God is believed to bind Himself to work only through the sacraments of the Church. His grace is always a mediated grace through the Church.

This point is crucial even beyond the specific topic under consideration. When Evangelicals deals with Roman Catholic theology, they tend to overlook the “sacramental dimension” of the Roman Church. They analyze common words, common concerns, and common language in an atomistic way and may come to the conclusion that the old divisions are over because the language is similar.

For example, this is the case in the book Is the Reformation Over? by Mark Noll and Carolyn Nystrom.[6] In a useful chapter which highlights the contents of the  Catechism of the Catholic Church, the authors argue that “evangelicals can embrace at least two-thirds” of it (119), and that it stems from “common orthodoxy” based on the ancient Trinitarian and Christological creeds. Later, they admit that when the Catechism speaks of Christ, it interweaves Him to the Church to the point of making them one (147; 149), which is unacceptable for Evangelicals who consider the exaltation of a created reality an instance of idolatry.

So, on the one hand, there is an apparent “common orthodoxy” and on the other, there is a profound difference on the doctrines of Christ, the Church, salvation, etc. Therefore, here is the key question: how can Evangelicals accept “two-thirds” of the Catechism if this document speaks of the (Roman Catholic) Church whenever it speaks of Christ, the Spirit, the Trinity, and regeneration? Evangelicals find it difficult to discern the “sacramental economy” in the Roman Catholic teachings and the result is that they easily misinterpret them, limiting their analysis to surface matters, failing to grasp the whole. Yet, the sacramental economy keeps the system together and makes it coherent. If one fails to appreciate it, he misses the whole point of it.

In dealing with Roman Catholicism, especially in times of mounting ecumenical pressure, Evangelical theology should attempt to go beyond the single, detached statements and seek to get a grip on the internal framework of reference Roman Catholic theology uses. Roman Catholic theology is more than the sum of its words. It is rather a complex, yet coherent system based on the “sacramental economy” whereby God is bound to act through the sacraments of the Church.

The Dividing Line

Surveying the tenets of the Evangelical Faith, J.I. Packer and Tom Oden remind us that “Evangelicalism characteristically emphasizes the penal-substitutionary view of the cross and the radical reality of the Bible-taught, Spirit-wrought inward change, relational and directional, that makes a person a Christian (new birth, regeneration, conversion, faith, repentance, forgiveness, new creation, all in and through Jesus Christ)”.[7] Regeneration is this inward change wrought by the Spirit that brings life to those who were dead in their sins. For the Catechism, this is a defective definition in that it lacks the reference to the “sacramental economy” whereby the Church that administers the sacrament of baptism that brings about regeneration. The Roman Catholics in defining regeneration use the same words but put them in a different world, that of a “sacramental economy”, one that has precluded Sola gratia. So the difference between the Evangelical and the Roman Catholic understanding of regeneration does not lie in some exegetical detail or theological minutia. Instead, it centers on nothing less than how God works out his work of salvation.

 


[1] J.I. Packer, God’s Words. Studies in Key Biblical Themes (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House Co., 1988) p. 149.

[2] Quotations will be taken by Catechism of the Catholic Church (London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1994). The electronic text can be found at http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM.

[3] This whole section of the Catechism echoes or quotes the Vatican II’s Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Lumen Gentium, 11.

[4] These terms here are confusing for a Protestant reader: “sanctifying grace” is defined as “the grace of justification”, therefore significantly blurring sanctification and justification. Ecumenical advocates tell us that the 1997 unofficial document “The Gift of Salvation” and the 1999 official Roman Catholic-Lutheran “Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification” reached a substantial agreement on sola fide. The reality is that the Catechism (which is far more authoritative than the just mentioned texts) keeps on confusing sanctification and justification, as the Council of Trent had done in the XVI century.

[5] In a more technical way, the Catechism speaks of the “sacramental economy” as “the communication of the fruits of Christ’s Paschal mystery in the celebration of the Church’s sacramental liturgy” (1076). One would need another article to begin to unpack this dense sentence.

[6] M.A. Noll and C. Nystrom, Is the Reformation Over? An Evangelical Assessment of Contemporary Roman Catholicism (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2005).

[7] James I. Packer – Thomas C. Oden, One Faith. The Evangelical Consensus (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2004) p. 160.

Posted on

62. A Church with Two Popes

July 22nd, 2013

There was a time when the Roman Catholic Church had one Pope and an Anti-Pope, fighting against each other. There was even a time when three Popes contended for the office with each of them claiming to be the only true and lawful Pope. These difficult times occurred between the Middle Ages and the early Modern era. Since then, the Roman Catholic Church has always been sure to emphasize that it is the one and only Church, basing this on the fact that it is ultimately governed by one head, i.e. the Pope. The one and only Pope has always been thought of as being an inherent and necessary feature of the oneness and unity of the Church.

The resignation of Pope Benedict XVI in February 2013 has opened a new era. The election of Pope Francis a month later gave the Roman Catholic Church its new leader, but with the former one still living. Since May 2nd both Popes, the reigning one and the emeritus, have lived shoulder to shoulder in the Vatican state in the shadow of Michelangelo’s cupola. Tomorrow’s historians will perhaps consider these facts as watershed events in the historical and theological development of Catholicism. Some critical voices can be heard here and there in conservative circles that envisage the long-term significance of such an innovation. Canon law experts are adamant that the Church still has only one Pope. This is canonically true but it is not the whole truth. Here are some tentative reflections.

Retirement Scheme

The historical pattern of maintaining the unique institution of the Papacy has been to elect a new Pope once the old one had died. True, Canon Law provides for a Pope to retire, but this provision has never been applied in the modern era and was created only for exceptional cases of sudden and unrecoverable sickness. Benedict XVI, however, did not apply it in such an extraordinary circumstance, but instead as if it were an ordinary retirement provision for an aging Pope. Although old and frail, Ratzinger still enjoys relatively good health. He walks, speaks, writes, and is not severely handicapped to the point of not being able to be autonomous in moving around and taking care of himself.

More substantially, the papacy was considered as a life-long office, a “cross” to be carried for the rest of one’s life, its terms coinciding with election (the beginning) and death (the end). The second term is now under question and an addendum, i.e. resignation, has been implemented. A retirement scheme was introduced by Benedict, as if the Papacy were like any other elected role. The exceptionality of the Papacy is now less exceptional and more comparable with other offices. The Pope is less of a once-and-for-all “divinely appointed” figure and more of a pro-tempore (for a time), provisional officer of a religious institution.

Cohabitation

New issues have been raised by Benedict’s retirement. How should a retired Pope be addressed in terms of his titles? How should he dress? Where should he live? What public profile should he have, if any? Ratzinger chose to live in the Vatican and committed himself to keeping a low profile, not travelling, not speaking, and not appearing much. The lauded beginning of Francis’ papacy has now overshadowed the old course. The question remains, however. What if a retired Pope begins to be vocal? What if he intervenes in the affairs of the Church? What if he becomes the leader of a church party? This perhaps will be not the case with Benedict, but now that the door has been opened, who can predict all the possible outcomes for future retired Popes?

The first fruit of the cohabitation was the recent release of the encyclical Lumen Fidei (Light of Faith). It was signed by Francis as his first encyclical but is largely dependent on Benedict XVI’s work. Other measures will be somewhat co-authored. Benedict tried to introduce changes in the curial machine after financial, sexual and administrative scandals undermined the credibility of the institution. It is certain that he spoke about these issues with Francis, hoping that he would take action. Meanwhile, Benedict is in the heart of the Vatican, vigil and alert to what his successor is doing.

Why a Pope?  

Having two living Popes at the same time has the potential to raise further questions about the divine nature of the Papacy. Will it, for example, trigger a long-term revision of the institution? The Papacy started as a historical leadership structure modeled after the Roman imperial pattern. Popes began to function as religious emperors as the Roman ones began to fade away. It was subsequently given a dogmatic status to the point of defining it as a de iure divino (according to divine law) office. Vatican I (1870) divinized the papacy by making the pope “infallible” when he exercises his teaching role. Now, Ratzinger’s resignation “humanizes” it by showing that this office is like any other human responsibility, i.e. temporary and subject to human weakness. Moreover, the Roman Catholic Church has a reigning Pope and a retired Pope living next to each other. Meanwhile, Pope Francis has inaugurated a style that seems to be light years away from the imperial pattern of the last 1500 years.

The ultimate question, however, is not the number of Popes, nor the contrast between a royal and a sober style. The hope is that all this will cause many Catholics to reflect on the nature of the Papacy beyond traditional dogmatic assertions and superficial apologetic arguments. Is it not the time to launch a radical re-thinking of the Papacy in light of Scripture?

Posted on

61. Lumen Fidei. The First Encyclical by Pope Francis

July 8th, 2013

As supreme teachers of the Roman Catholic Church, Popes write encyclicals to expound aspects of Christian belief that they deem particularly relevant or important for their time. Encyclicals mark the theological profile of a given pontificate and provide a helpful interpretative grid to it. It is, therefore, interesting to read Pope Francis’ first encyclical which was officially presented today (July 5th, 2013), and is titled: Lumen Fidei (LF), The Light of Faith. It is Bergoglio’s first theologically articulate work since becoming Pope Francis.

Benedict XVI’s Blueprint

The first element worth noting is that it is actually a work that comes from Benedict XVI, now Pope emeritus. Ratzinger had planned a trilogy of encyclicals on the theological virtues of Love, Hope and Faith (in this order). In this respect he wrote Deus Caritas Est (God is Love, 2005) and Spe Salvi (Saved in Hope, 2007) and was about to publish the final one on Faith, having already completed the first draft. His unexpected resignation brought everything to a halt. Evidently he passed the manuscript on to Francis who thought it would be a good idea to release it as part of his own teaching and after adding “a few contributions” of his own (7). We are therefore confronted with an encyclical signed by Francis but largely shaped by Benedict XVI.

Ratzinger’s contribution is evident throughout the text. Nearly all the quotations come from either the German tradition (e.g. F. Nietzsche, 2; M. Buber, 13; R. Guardini, 22; L. Wittgenstein, 27; H. Schlier, 30) or the larger European culture (Dante, 4; J.-J. Rousseau, 14; F. Dostoevsky, 16; J.H. Newman, 48; T.S. Eliot, 75). It is clear that a scholar like Ratzinger stands behind these discussions. The beloved Augustine is by far the most quoted Church Father (e.g. 10, 15, 19, 23, 31, 33, 43, 48). It was Augustine’s theology that was the subject of Ratzinger’s doctorate. The themes and the tone of Ratzinger’s thought are also powerfully reflected in how this encyclical deals with the issue of truth and relativism (e.g. 25), or modernity and its “totalitarianism” that excludes faith (e.g. 54).

Apparently Francis is at ease with all this and therefore makes no changes or modifications. LF recalls “the gift of apostolic succession” through which the Church’s memory is granted continuity (49) and the encyclical itself testifies to the unbroken succession of the Papacy even as far as doctrine is concerned.

Evangelical Language but …

LF is a long reflection on faith which is divided into four parts. It starts with the Biblical character of Abraham and the subsequent story of the people of Israel. The language is biblical (e.g. faith departs from idolatry, 13) and the tone is Evangelical (e.g. faith is a “personal encounter”, 13). At one point the text goes as far as saying that “We believe in Jesus when we personally welcome him into our lives and journey towards him, clinging to him in love and following in his footsteps along the way” (18). Stopping here, one might think this is an Evangelical document which stresses the personal language of faith. This is not the whole story, however.

Continue reading, however, and one finds a section entitled “Salvation by faith”. Notice the absence of the adverb “alone”, which is of course foundational for an Evangelical understanding of salvation. The XVI century Protestant Reformation insisted that salvation is “by faith alone”, but ever since the Council of Trent, the Roman Catholic Church has not accepted the doctrine of salvation by grace alone through faith alone. In fact, Francis writes that “the beginning of salvation is openness to something prior to ourselves” (19). Faith, suggests the Pope, is only the beginning of the process, but the journey of the believer requires faith plus works, faith through the sacraments, and faith with the Church that imparts the sacraments. In other words, the faith of the LF is the faith that the Council of Trent defined in its decrees and canons. Part of the language has become Evangelical, but at its core the theological substance is Roman Catholic.

Sacramental Faith

The third part of LF explains in further detail. Here Francis (and Benedict) want to underline the fact that the Church is “the mother of our faith” (37-38). Our faith is never originated in ourselves as individuals, but precedes us and follows us. It is through “the apostolic Tradition preserved in the Church” that faith is born and nurtured. Quoting Vatican II, Francis writes that “the Church, in her doctrine, life and worship, perpetuates and transmits to every generation all that she herself is, all that she believes” (40). It is no longer the Word of God that leads the way, but the Church. The way it does so is through the sacraments. In one revealing passage, LF says that “faith itself possesses a sacramental structure” (40). According to LF, faith is a personal encounter, but faith is also received through the sacraments. These are the two sides of the same coin. What follows is a brief explanation of the Roman Catholic doctrine of baptismal regeneration (41-43) and the Eucharist (44-45), which are the gateway of faith and its highest expression. The Pope goes on to say that this doctrine is one and the same, i.e. the personal and the sacramental dimensions of faith are undivided (47-49).

As it is common in encyclicals, LF also ends with an invocation to Mary, “Mother of the Church, Mother of our faith” (58-60). While the disciples asked Jesus to increase their faith (Luke 17:5), LF ends with a prayer to Mary: “Mother, help our faith!”.

Lumen Fidei well depicts the current appropriation of Evangelical language by important sectors of the Roman Catholic Church. It started with “evangelization” and now continues with faith as “personal encounter”. Pope Francis seems to be leading the way in this process. This appropriation, however, must be put in the context of the traditional Roman Catholic doctrine that is Tridentine, sacramental and Marian.

Posted on

60. 100 Days with Pope Francis

March 12th 2013, Cardinal Bergoglio was elected to the chair of Peter becoming Pope Francis, the 266th Pope of the Roman Catholic Church. This count takes for granted that Peter was the first Pope and that an unbroken chain of successors followed up to now. This theological account of Church history is, of course, disputable but that is not the point here. The point is to take advantage of this symbolic event to begin to see what is emerging as far as Francis’ interpretation of the Papacy is concerned.

On-Going Exposure

Francis speaks every day in public. He celebrates Mass every morning at 7:00 AM and a summary of his daily homily quickly becomes available for the media. The gist of it is twittered. His speeches are much simpler and shorter than Benedict XVI’s, the language is plain, and the structure often highlights single important words which form the bulk of his reflection. There is always a personal application and the recipient of it is “us” rather than “you” or “them”. He uses many fewer quotations from Church tradition (the Church Fathers were always present in Ratzinger’s talks) and more references to daily episodes of life and Bible quotations. Francis likes to be surrounded by people. He chose not to live segregated in the papal apartments but to stay in the guest house in the Vatican, sharing the dining room and other common spaces with others. His Wednesday’s public audiences in St. Peter’s square are less concentrated on words and more devoted to personal interactions. He normally goes around the square, stopping his papamobile here and there to touch people, kiss babies, and play with children exchanging hats and receiving gifts. The emotional aspect prevails over the cognitive one. Francis is less of a hieratic, unreachable Pope and more of an “older brother” or fatherly type of Pope who is showing all his charming personality.

From the End of the World to the Edges of the World

As soon as he was elected, Francis told that he was coming from “the end of the world”. Ratzinger had come from the “heart” of Europe, he comes from the ends of the globe from a Euro-centric or Western perspective. He is conscious of his origins in the Global South and his background also determines his goal. He often says that the mission of the Church is to go to the peripheries of the world and to be attracted by those who are outside of the various centers of power and influence. Where he comes from is where he wants to go. Now that he leads the “center” of a global institution, it will be interesting to see what going to the peripheries will mean for a centralized and self-referential organization like the Vatican. Francis seems to be willing to shift the attention to the ends of the world, geographically and socially.

Infiltration Rather Than Confrontation

His style of argumentation is also coming through. Whereas Ratzinger used to be seen as confrontational in his approach to Western culture (often banging on the head of “nihilism”, the “dictatorship of relativism”, etc.), Bergoglio is perceived as a mild person who stirs attention rather than hitting his hearers. On life issues he is traditional but not in an irritating way for secular people. On marriage he is conservative but capable of maintaining an open dialogue with the gay lobby. His strategy seems to be that of infiltration rather than confrontation. On the inter-faith dialogue he always stresses the brotherhood of all religious people, leaving aside the controversial issues. Mercy has the final word. He has an embracing attitude rather than a tug-of-war approach.

Spiritual Ecumenism

This fraternal mood is also true as far as ecumenism is concerned. Francis talks a lot about Christian unity and emphasizes the importance of common prayer and brotherly relationships. Technically, this is what “spiritual ecumenism” is all about, i.e. unity that is expressed in joint prayer, although he has not been using this language so far. All non-Catholic counterparts, from Liberal Protestants to many Evangelicals, seem to like this and have the impression that he is rather easy-going as far as unity is concerned. He recently told the audience in St. Peter’s square that he had spent half an hour in prayer with an Italian Evangelical pastor (June 19th). Less people paid attention to what he had just said before, i.e. that unity means being in fellowship with the Pope and the bishops. Beyond the seemingly Pauline language, he endorsed the Roman Catholic view that unity means to be cum Petro (with Peter) and sub Petro (under Peter). The relationship with the Pope defines Christian unity. Meanwhile, he has been outspokenly Marian in his devotions and very Eucharistic-centered in his teaching.

Poverty, Poverty …

Poverty is a catchword of Bergoglio’s pontificate. The choice of the name Francis was indicative of an entire program. He has certainly given a more sober bent to what it means “to live like a Pope”. He wears an iron cross, instead of a golden one. He uses less luxurious vestments. He calls for a simple lifestyle. In commenting on the recent financial scandals, he humorously said that Peter did not have a bank! The problem is that the Pope has a bank! Will Francis have the courage to close it? The reference to Francis of Assisi marks his grandeur but perhaps his limits as well. Francis spoke of poverty and lived in poverty in the XIII century, but the Church he submitted to remained opulent and went on pursuing its mundane affairs. Will Pope Francis be able or willing to implement Church practices that are marked by simplicity and frugality? Perhaps we should wait another 100 days to answer.

Leonardo De Chirico

Rome, 22nd June 2013