Category: Vatican Files English

Sexuality is not an easy topic for any religious institution. In these matters, who is without sin, let him cast the first stone. Moralizing on others’ failures and nurturing superiority attitudes are not the right approach in addressing the problem. In this field our evangelical grass is not greener than others’. This past year, however, has been an annus horribilis (i.e. horrible year) for the RC Church as far as sex is concerned.

The RC Church has a serious problem with sexuality.

1. It places the highest standards on its own clergy, i.e. mandatory celibacy, yet it is estimated that one third of RC clergy have a sexually active life. If you expect your own representatives to adhere to certain standards of sexual behavior, you are more easily subject to public scrutiny if your inner circle fails to comply.
2. The RC’s moral vision entails the sacredness of a monogamous, heterosexual marriage and the condemnation of other sexual orientations. If you are vocal in telling people what is permissible and “right” regarding sexual practices, and what is “wrong” concerning abuses, then your own inconsistencies appear to be more heinous.
3. Records of abuses and scandals within the RC Church have recently been spotted worldwide after decades of denial and self-protection. We live in a world that no longer keeps secrets, and society at large is now entitled to ask serious questions about the whole matter.
4. The problem is at all levels: recruiting young people, training seminarians, supervising the sexual life of religious people, facing failures, promoting a transparent culture, etc. The credibility of the entire system is at stake.

            Last week the Vatican Congregation for Sacred Doctrine issued certain guidelines to the RC bishops in order to address the issue. For the Vatican, sexuality is not primarily a pastoral matter, but a doctrinal one and the institution charged to address it is the same that presides over doctrinal purity. The thrust of the guidelines asks local bishops to be more vigilant and collaborative, therefore implying that little vigilance and little collaboration have too often been the practice in the past.

Is mandatory celibacy biblical?

The problem is huge and complex. Yet, for Bible-believing people, the first and decisive question is simple: does the Bible teach or require celibacy to ministers of the church? The answer is as simple as the question: No. While considering celibacy a calling as worthy as marriage (e.g. 1 Corinthians 7), the Bible normally expects that elders, bishops and deacons be married (e.g. 1 Timothy 3:2-5; Titus 1:6). The RC tradition of mandatory celibacy stems from a dualistic and hierarchical distinction between a “higher” religious calling and a “lower” secular one. It is also a means to “control” the clergy and to safeguard the patrimonial heritage of the church from being dispersed.

There is no argument in favor of mandatory celibacy that is biblically conclusive. Therefore it should be open for change. The Bible seems to expect that most ministers be married and that few be single. Will the Bible be allowed to have the final word, which is also a better word than the RC traditional settlement? Will the “Biblical renewal,” that according to some observers is taking place within the RC Church, be allowed to modify this long-standing tradition? No sign in this direction can be seen for now. Both John Paul II and Benedict XVI have actually reinforced mandatory celibacy, making it even more difficult to change.

Is full transparency desirable?

Public opinion has also been struck by the self-complacent attitude that some RC bishops around the world have shown in dealing with abuses. Instead of denouncing and stopping them, there has been a general tendency to cover them up. The interests of the Church seemed to be greater than the suffering of the victims. The protection of the church was often preferred to the protection of the abused children. In a complex organization like the RC Church, failures are to be expected, but the impression is that the problem lied in the “chain of command” rather than in sporadic cases. There is a widespread code of conduct that puts the church first, above truth and above reality, as if the primary concern is to seek what the church can gain no matter the cost.

 Historically, the RC Church has been attacked by ideological and political forces and has developed a self-protective attitude, like most historical institutions have done. At the same time, it has built a high dogmatic view of itself, claiming to be the societas perfecta (i.e. the perfect society), or the indefectible Church, i.e. the Church that cannot err. It can judge others but cannot be judged by others. It can denounce the sin of the world, but the world is not allowed to denounce its sins. The sexual scandals and abuses show that it is time to become more humble and accountable, less reticent and self-complacent. If self-protection becomes absolute, then it becomes an idol. We are all, however, in danger of elevating our institutions to a place of idolatrous worship, i.e. ecclesiolatry, the worship of the church as an institution.

“Sex and the Vatican” is much more than mere gossip, and it’s more than a justice and moral issue. It is an opportunity for repentance, Biblical reformation, and public transparency. We all need that.

Leonardo De Chirico

leonardo.dechirico@ifeditalia.org

Rome, 30^th May 2011

Vatican II is once again back in the global RC agenda. The most important event in the history of the XX century RC Church (1962-1965) is still a matter of dispute in RC circles. Was it progressive or traditionalist? Did it intend to reform the Church or to reinforce it? Was it doctrinally focused or more pastorally oriented? What is more important, its documents or its “spirit”? Was it primarily an “event” or did it initiate a “movement”? These are only a few of the questions that are still being debated, and the way one answers them is not just a matter of academic taste, but has heavy consequences on the whole RC project in the global world.

 

Vatican II according to “left” and “right”

Generally speaking, there are two main schools of thought. For convenience we’ll call them “left” and “right.” On the one hand there is the interpretative school that sees Vatican II as breaking with the old traditional RC outlook and inserting a progressive trend within the Church. This has been the direction of theologians like Hans Küng and historians like Giuseppe Alberigo. According to this progressive interpretation, while Vatican II introduced significant “change”, Paul VI, John Paul II and Benedict XVI have been silencing its potential in areas like ecclesiology, liturgy, and morality and imposing a rigid reading that squares with the traditional self-understanding of the RC Church. Curiously, this view was shared by traditionalists like Msgr. Lefebvre who charged Vatican II of betraying RC identity, having marred it with mortal doses of Protestant and secular poison. Therefore opposite reactions stemmed from the same interpretation of Vatican II being in discontinuity with the past.

The mainstream interpretative school, on the other hand, has insisted that Vatican II stands in substantial continuity with Vatican I (1870-1871), actually completing what was left unfinished, and doing so with the great tradition of the Church (e.g. Trent, the Marian dogmas, etc.). No “real” change has occurred but only a dynamic re-statement of the well established RC heritage. At Vatican II the RC Church approached the modern world in more “pastoral” terms, without modifying its basic framework. According to this linear reading, Vatican II at most brought an “aggiornamento” (i.e. updating) to the language and the concerns of the Church, while still maintaining and reinforcing her fundamental stance.

 

Ratzinger’s “hermeneutics of reform-in-continuity”

In recent years and months, the debate on Vatican II has been revived by different evaluations of what the present Pope thinks of Vatican II and how he is implementing it. Ratzinger was present at the Council and gave voice to the need for “renewal.” Yet in later years he has became a critic of reforming trends in areas such as liturgy, ecumenism and political involvement. As prefect of the Congregation for Sacred Doctrine, he fought against all tendencies that in his opinion were watering down the traditional beliefs and practices of the RC Church. Now that he is Pope Vatican II is at the center of his agenda.

Benedict XVI has been reflecting publicly on Vatican II since the beginning of his pontificate. In a 2005 speech he clearly set his course by saying that the Council needs to be read according to a “hermeneutics of reform-in-continuity”. He has been using and expounding the same expression ever since. According to the Pope, Vatican II breached the traditional RC understanding of the state and the temporal power of the RC church, thus acknowledging the value of religious freedom and a degree of separation between church and state, thus overcoming the subjugation of the state before the church. In this restricted sense it was a “reforming” Council. Benedict XVI, however, thinks that Vatican II simply reiterated the RC dogmatic system without altering it in any way. In this sense, the Council is in real continuity with Trent and Vatican I. Therefore Ratzinger is neither a “left” nor “right” wing interpreter. In reality these categories are totally inadequate in coming to terms not only with Ratzinger, but also with Vatican II. The RC understanding of historical development entails “reform-in-continuity”, “aggiornamento” without renouncing, addition without subtraction, expansion without purification. Unless one grasps this “both-and” approach he will fall prey to fragmented and insufficient accounts of RC. “Reform-in-continuity” is the genius of RC.

 

Overcoming the Evangelical puzzlement

Vatican II has been the crux of Evangelical theology as well. Understanding and appraising what happened at the Council is still a task worthy of attention. The best Evangelical treatment of Vatican II (Revolution in Rome, 1972, by David Wells) is a series of question marks that show just how puzzled Evangelical theology was in dealing with modern RC. Its chapters’ titles reveal the conundrum: “Authority: inward or outward?” “God: in the earthly or the heavenly city?” “Christianity: a broad or narrow definition?” “The Church: the people or the Pope?”. In approaching Vatican II some Evangelicals have taken the “right” wing interpretation saying that nothing has changed. The RC is semper eadem (always the same), they say. Others have followed the progressive view claiming that at Vatican II the Spirit of renewal blew in Rome, turning it upside down in gospel terms. Neither interpretation is correct. RC is more complex than the usual labels in that it is neither static nor reforming per se. It is always the same, yet in an expansive trajectory. It is a growing body, yet holding the same DNA. Unless we understand this point, we fail to grasp the basics of RC. It is time that Evangelicals learn to read Vatican II through appropriate lens. There is still homework to be done. With his hermeneutics of “reform-in-continuity”, Benedict XVI can certainly help in the task.

 

Leonardo De Chirico

leonardo.dechirico@ifeditalia.org

 

Rome, 24th May 2011

 

 

 

John Paul II is now “blessed”, according to the canon law of the RC Church. The ceremonies that took place in Rome between April 30^th and May 1^st were followed by a couple million people who were present in one or more of the events and celebrations, and by millions of people around the world who were watching on TV, or observed by means of other media outlets. It is true that the events in Rome were a bit overshadowed by the royal wedding in London, on the one hand, and the shooting of Bin Laden in Pakistan, on the other. The impression is that these two world events somewhat obscured the beatification of John Paul II, at least from a media point of view. The latter, however, was impressive and thought-provoking.

It so happens that I was not in Rome when the ceremonies took place. I was actually in the USA visiting churches and promoting Gospel work in Rome. For this reason I had the opportunity to observe the beatification from a distance, as most people would normally do. Instead of being an eye-witness and fully immersed in the events, I had the chance of being a distant observer with little internet access, some exposure to TV coverage, and only and quick perusal of one or two secular newspapers. In a sense, this is the way that most people would normally have access to Vatican events, and more generally to issues related to Roman Catholicism (grabbing some bullet points, listening to some catchwords, or watching some selected pictures, and that’s all). Little theological awareness, little help in grasping the big picture, and little analysis of what happened. Is this the way in which most Evangelicals form their evaluation of Roman Catholicism?

I was impressed by what I could not gather from a distance. Here are two main pieces of information that stood out to me as a “normal” busy person looking superficially at what took place in Rome.

A memorial service?

The first bit of information I picked up was that what took place in Rome had actually been a “memorial service” celebrating the political achievements, the charming personality, and the ecclesiastical success of John Paul II. The framework was the celebrity status applied to a global-scale religious figure. In a world in which few people deserve praise, John Paul II was commended as a “hero” of his time. A memorial service is something that is palatable to most people, Evangelicals included. There is nothing wrong in nurturing the memory of a person and treasuring the lessons of their life. This, however, is not the main thrust of the beatification. Beatification is a recognition by the RC Church that the person beatified can be presented to the faithful as an intercessor for their needs, worries, sickness, etc. The faithful are encouraged to pray the beatus in order to receive healing and protection. The faithful are encouraged to bow down before the beatus, to have sacred pictures of the beatus, and to develop a fully-orbed devotion for the beatus. In other words, beatification is a decision by the RC Church to add another mediator to the thousands that are already there. Beatification touches on the mediatorship of Jesus Christ. Christ alone is not sufficient in himself, but shares his mediator role with other figures that the RC Church recognizes as “blessed” (and then eventually “saints”). Notwithstanding RC uneasiness to acknowledge this, beatification is a subtraction from the sufficiency of Christ’s work and the full humanity of his person. The “blessed” is added to Christ. Therefore holding a “memorial service” is one thing, perhaps even compatible with basic Biblical teaching, though always in danger of paying too much tribute to the celebrity culture. Proclaiming beatus upon a person is very different in that it diverts the faithful away from Christ and towards the beatus himself. Unfortunately, the latter meaning was absent from what I could gather as a distant observer.

 

A Christ-centered message?

The other impression that was apparent from what I was exposed to was that the general tone of the celebrations was Christ-centered. Few quotations from Benedict XVI’s homily were mentioned and they seemed to refer to John Paul II’s relationship with Christ. The pope was praised as a “servant of Christ” and a “follower of Christ”. (By the way, these expressions are the same that Billy Graham uses in his forward of a picture book on John Paul II that was on display in the US airports’ bookshops). What the media failed to do, however, was to present the Marian framework which was the framework of the whole celebration. On Saturday night more than 300,000 people gathered for a Marian vigil of prayer, all singing totus tuus (“wholly yours”, the Pope’s motto expressing his devotion to Mary), and prayed to Mary all night. Moreover, the homily of Benedict XVI contained many references to the Marian spirituality of John Paul II, commending it to the faithful as the way to uphold Christian witness in today’s world. On Sunday the coffin of John Paul II and the relics of his blood were displayed in St. Peter’s square for veneration by the people. Had I not had a basic knowledge of RC and a bit of spiritual curiosity to go beyond the headlines, I would have had the impression that the beatification was indeed Christ-centered, which in actual fact was not.

The beatification of John Paul II was a reminder of several challenges that we all face. First, relying on the general media as a first point of reference to the reality and accuracy of events is often misleading. Second, relying on a superficial awareness of RC helps in developing a distorted picture of it, and as a result an inaccurate understanding emerges. Third, if most Evangelicals rely on the general media and on a superficial awareness of RC, it is not surprising that we are naive (to say the least) in our evaluation of it.

 

Leonardo De Chirico

leonardo.dechirico@ifeditalia.org

Rome, 14^th May 2011

Roman Catholicism is accomplished at handling both macro and micro dimensions of its universe. For example, the Catechism of the Catholic Church is a breathtaking synthesis of the millenary-old wisdom of the Church. It provides an instance of the ability of the RC Church to master and condense history, doctrine, and culture. Yet the same ability is observable in a careful analysis of a liturgical celebration. Every gesture, movement, action, word, etc., is a part of the whole which informs it.  Attention to both universals and particulars belong in the same RC realm.

The combination of both macro and micro dimensions will be displayed in the intensive 3-day beatification of John Paul II. More than 300.000 people are expected to be in Rome for this event and the program is a reflection of the “catholic” breadth of the Church as well as of her “roman” character. The catholicity of the Church will be demonstrated by the presence of all the cardinals and especially by the participation of the massive number of people at the various stages of the beatification: the Marian prayer vigil on Saturday,April 30^th; the beatification ceremony on Sunday, May 1^st; and the thanksgiving Mass on Monday May 2^nd. The whole celebration will be marked by a strong Marian accent given the particular Marian devotion of John Paul II, but also by a powerful presentation of the heroic virtues of the previous Pope.

The Saturday night Marian prayer vigil is an attempt to honor the Marianism of the former Pope and to commend it to the faithful. The open air vigil will commence with a procession behind the Maria Salus Populi Romani (“Mary the salvation of the Roman people”), a Byzantine Marian icon that is deemed to be the protector of the Romans, followed by her enthronement at Circus Maximum. The elevation of the icon is a symbol of Mary being the object of public hyper-veneration, i.e. the unique tribute of honor that the RC Church pays to her. The crowd will then join in the singing of the hymn Totus Tuus (“Wholly yours”), echoing John Paul II’s motto that indicated his total commitment to Mary. A Marian rosary will follow in satellite link with five Marian sanctuaries: Krakow (Poland), Bugando (Tanzania), Harissa (Lebanon), Guadalupe (Mexico) and Fatima (Portugal). These places were all visited by John Paul II during his long pontificate and video excerpts of his speeches on Mary will be shown on large screens. During the night the crowd will be encouraged to join in prayers to Mary. The beatification ceremonies will be a great boost to Marian spirituality .

The following day the beatification ceremony will be held in St Peter’s square, accompanied by Wojtyła’s coffin which will be taken out of its present location. During the ceremony, the Pope will be officially presented to the RC Church as a recipient of petitions and intercessions of the faithful. Prayers to him and votive masses will be encouraged in RC practice and piety. Then the crowd will pay homage to the coffin in a prolonged and visual expression of communion between the living and the dead. It will perhaps take days to ensure that all present will have an opportunity to do so. After praying to Mary, the people will pray to John Paul II. Prayer will be one of the catchwords of the beatification event, yet one always needs to ask to whom prayer will be presented and in which spiritual framework.

Outside of the RC theological and doctrinal framework, it is difficult to come to terms with these deep convictions and widely practiced patterns of spirituality. Some Evangelicals would like to think that they are peripheral and non-essential, related only to fringe movements and folk religious expressions. Yet reality says that this is not the case. We are dealing with the core of the RC faith, appealing especially to the masses and totally integrated into the doctrinal outlook of the RC Church. After a book on Jesus of Nazareth, Benedict XVI will highlight Mary of John Paul II. His faith allows – or better – demands to do both in the same breath. The beatification of John Paul II will be a display of the RC’s ability to strongly uphold what other Christians would consider as far away from basic Christianity.

Leonardo De Chirico
leonardo.dechirico@ifeditalia.org

Rome, 11^th April 2011

Atheism has been at the center of the RC Church’s worries since the time of the Counter-Reformation. During the peak of the clash between the Enlightenment and the Vatican in the XIX century, Pope Pius IX issued the Syllabus (1864) in which “atheism” was added to the dreadful list of modern mistakes. A century later, Vatican II inaugurated a milder approach to atheism by attempting to engage its adherents in dialogue and to listen to their concerns. Gaudium et Spes – one of the Council’s main documents – addressed the issue of atheism in nuanced terms, challenging the church to go beyond mere confrontation. A Vatican Secretariat for the dialogue with Non-Believers was formed in 1965, then in 1988 it was turned into a Pontifical Council (a higher status) and eventually merged with the Pontifical Council for Culture (1993). After the fall of Communism, that had proclaimed “God is dead”, it seemed that atheism was going through a steady decline in appealing to present-day society as an alternative to traditional Christianity. More than atheism, however, the religion of our time seemed to be a new form of idolatry, i.e. egolatry (the cult of the self). But September 11, 2001 changed once more the tide in the West. As a reaction to the resurgence of religious-political fanaticism, a new and rampant atheism has become vocal and is capturing media interest and the imagination of the youth. It is a highly ideological and very antagonist form of atheism. What is the RC Church doing to confront this challenge on a global scale? One attempt is called the “Courtyard of the Gentiles”.

 

A symbolic place for meeting “strangers”

The choice of the name (Courtyard of the Gentiles) brand is highly evocative. The Second Temple in Jerusalem had a courtyard where the “gentiles” were allowed in. It was a place of meditation, listening, observation and dialogue, as well as a place of business (e.g. Jesus was not happy with its transformation into a market-place). Priests and scribes often gathered there to meet and dialogue with inquiring foreigners. The new initiative of the Pontifical Council for Culture wishes to set up an itinerant courtyard to become a place of dialogue with atheists in a spirit of mutual respect and desire to engage in meaningful exchange. Cardinal Gianfranco Ravasi, an erudite biblical scholar and able communicator, is the head of the Pontifical Council for Culture and the main inspirer of the “Courtyard of the Gentiles”. In his project, the first phase will try to involve those atheists who are perhaps as serious as believers in asking fundamental questions about God, life, evil, freedom, etc. The harshest and most offensive atheists (à la Richard Dawkins, for example) are for the moment outside of the Courtyard’s radar. It should be noted, however, that both practical and militant atheists are a top priority on the RC Church’s agenda.

 

The “catholic” scope

The first event was in Paris (24-25 March 2011) where the three-day initiative involved UNESCO, the Sorbonne and the Institut de France on the general theme of “Enlightenment, religions and common reason”. Academic events, festivals and concerts, among other things, were all part of the Courtyard. The hope is that it will become a catalyst for further and on-going opportunities for dialogue with non-believers. Of course local RC parishes and other RC movements will be all involved. Churches will be open and prayer vigils will be organized. Academics and Taizé groups, cardinals and fringe intellectuals, pop music bands and vanguard artists, celebrities and ecclesial movements, liturgies and hyper-technological shows…will all be on display, demonstrating the catholicity of the RC Church in action. It will be a highly organized and well thought-out apologetic exercise in RC fashion, both elitist and popular, both traditional and innovative, both word-oriented and image-oriented, both Catholic and ecumenical. After Paris, the courtyard will be set up in Tirana (2011), Stockholm (2011), Prague (2012), Assisi (2012), Geneva (2012), Québec (2012), Marseille (2013), Moscow (2013), Chicago and then Washington (2013). The website has lots of information (www.atriumgentium.org) and gives an idea of the breadth of the project. Will it succeed, however, in bringing people back to the Church?

 

A test-case for Benedict XVI’s papacy

Pope Benedict XVI’s agenda has fully emerged , and is now being implemented. From the beginning of his pontificate he said that the secular and post-Christian West should be the primary target of the RC Church. Both baptized, non-practicing Catholics, and perhaps baptized yet un-believing people are the main target. The New Evangelization, on the one hand, and the “Courtyard of the Gentiles”, on the other, are the tools that will be used to try to make a difference in both camps. Ratzinger’s papacy will be largely measured around their success or failure.

 

Leonardo De Chirico
leonardo.dechirico@ifeditalia.org

Rome, 28^th March 2011