Category: Vatican Files English

One million copies published in 29 languages and distributed in 73 countries. These are the row figures on the last book about Jesus recently published by Pope Benedict XVI. The new volume ends the series that Ratzinger began projecting before his election to the papacy, and now it finally comes to fruition, when he is 85 years old and presides over a complex state, i.e. the Vatican, and the Roman Catholic Church, which of course is a global institution.

            The new volume follows the 2007 one that touched on the story of Jesus from his baptism to the Transfiguration, and the 2011 one which dealt with the Passion and the Resurrection. The new book focuses on the Infancy Narratives, i.e. the 180 verses that Matthew and Luke wrote to publicize the events preceding and following Jesus’ birth up to when he was twelve years old.

1. Historical Facts Theologically Interpreted

It is important to appreciate the background of Ratzinger’s books. Why is he writing on the life of Jesus according to the Gospels? In the late XIX century, different “lives” of Jesus were written in the attempt to separate the “Jesus of history” from the “Christ of faith”. The main assumption was that Christology had little if nothing to do with what really happened to Jesus, which is something that went beyond historical research and belonged to the realm of faith only. Liberal scholars argued that we know nearly nothing of the historical Jesus, yet we have a highly developed Christology that is not based on the historical records of the facts of Jesus’ life, but on the faith of subsequent communities. Therefore, the Gospels were considered as accounts driven by what the first Christians believed, not necessarily by what really happened. These views were and are still widely accepted among Catholic Biblical scholarship.

            Ratzinger writes to readdress this whole issue. The way he does it is through his own effort to comment on the Gospels. His goal is to affirm the basic historicity of the Gospel accounts and therefore the historical nature of the Christian faith which is centered on the historical Jesus. Benedict XVI argues that, in the Gospels, faith and history, facts and their theological interpretation, internal Biblical evidence and external historical evidence are intertwined. Yet, the theological significance of Jesus’ life is based on what really happened, not at the expense of it or even not interfering with history. So, in the case of the Infancy Narratives, we are confronted with a reliable account of what really happened (including the star and the Magi), coupled with a theological explanation of the birth of Jesus, His Person and work.

2. A Change of Mind?

It is interesting to note a shift of emphasis here. In the 1993 document on “The Interpretation of the Bible in the Church”, the Pontifical Biblical Commission (whose chairman was Raztinger himself) tended to overlook the relationship between faith and history in the Biblical text. It assumed that the historical-critical methods were just neutral scholarly tools without any pre-conceived assumption as far as the historical reliability of the Bible was concerned.

            Historically, this is not true. Historical-critical methods were the chosen weapons to try to dismantle the trustworthiness of the Written Word of God. Moreover, the reality is that most Catholic academic Biblical scholars do have skeptical views about the historicity of Scripture and carry their skepticism under the banner of the historical-critical methods.

            In 1993 Ratzinger seemed to be rather naive about the dangers of separating faith from history and of considering the Bible a book stemming from faith but not rooted in history. Now he seems to be more aware of the issues and wants to provide an example of Biblical interpretation that takes the historicity of the Bible seriously. Will his books of Jesus stir a debate in Catholic exegetical circles? Will they readdress the confidence in the historical reliability of the Bible in Catholic academia and the wider public?

3. A Commendation and a Couple of Reservations

Ratzinger’s book on the Infancy Narratives is not a technical piece of exegesis. It is rather a spiritual commentary on the Gospel narratives which speak about how the Son of God became a man. They are long meditations following the synoptic order of events of Jesus’ life, with some questions and applications for the contemporary reader.

            The final book is even better than the previous one. The latter portrayed Jesus as if he were a priest going around celebrating Masses everywhere he turned. Ratzinger’s sacramental reading of the Gospels heavily influenced his interpretation of the Passion. This book is a more straightforward and canonical reading of Jesus’ story firmly rooted in the OT and linked to subsequent NT teachings. It is perhaps the best of the series, with two reservations.

            Commenting on the fact that various details of the Infancy Narratives originated in the accounts given by Mary herself (who was the only witness present), the Pope also infers that other Marian traditions which are not found in the NT derive from the same source. The issue, then, is: why didn’t Luke or Matthew add them to their Gospels? More fundamentally, why didn’t the Holy Spirit inspire the Evangelists to insert them in the canonical texts? What is in Scripture and has become Scripture has an all together different status than other traditions claiming the same origin.

            The other perplexity has to do with Ratzinger’s comment on Luke 2:7: “She gave birth to her firstborn”. Here the Pope spends a couple of pages arguing that the reference to Jesus being the “firstborn” does not imply that Mary had other children. In fact, he affirms the perpetual virginity of Mary. But is this really what the text here is saying or suggesting? Is the later Roman Catholic doctrine of Mary’s perpetual virginity not a development that is based more on Marian elaborations rather than on what the Gospels say?

Leonardo De Chirico

leonardo.dechirico@ifeditalia.org

Rome, 30^th November 2012

The Synod for the New Evangelization can be thought of as “a master of a house, who brings out of his treasure what is new and what is old” (Matthew 13:52, ESV). Jesus’ explanation of the parable of the net is a useful starting point to come to terms with what happened at the Synod that just ended (7-28 October 2012). After weeks of intensive discussions, its final act was the drafting of a list of 58 propositions (i.e. points worthy of attention) that were presented to the Pope for his consideration in the future promulgation of a papal document (Apostolic Exhortation) that will become part of the Magisterium of the Church. The shape of the New Evangelization (NE) is becoming more and more clear, at least on paper, while it remains to be seen what practical outcomes will result from it. The achievements of the Synod as reflected by these propositions are a mixture of new and old things that call for discernment in order to not concentrate on a few selected items alone.

1. The Trinitarian Overture and the Marian Finale

“The Church and her evangelizing mission have their origin and source in the Most Holy Trinity according to the plan of the Father, the work of the Son, which culminated in his death and glorious Resurrection, and the mission of the Holy Spirit. The Church continues this mission of God’s love in our world” (n. 4). There can be no clearer Biblical foundation for the NE, although how the Church continues the mission of God is not spelt out. Is it by way of prolonging the Son’s incarnation and therefore having received His prophetic (magisterial authority), priestly (sacramental system) and kingly (hierarchical structure) offices?

            This is only one side of the coin, however. As is standard practice in Catholic documents, the final thought goes to Mary. The Trinitarian opening is only introductory, but is not conclusive for the NE. It is part of a wider picture that is not complete unless the Mariological dimension comes to the fore. Here it what the Synod says in the last proposition: “As Mother and Queen she is a sign of hope for suffering and needy peoples. Today she is the ‘Missionary’ who will aid us in the difficulties of our time and with her nearness open the hearts of men and women to the faith. We fix our gaze on Mary. She will help us to proclaim the message of salvation to all men and women, so that they too may become agents of Evangelization. Mary is the Mother of the Church. Through her presence, may the Church become a home for many and Mother of all peoples” (n. 58).  On the one hand there is a welcomed Trinitarian framework for mission, yet on the other hand we also find the reinstatement of a comprehensive Marian vision for the NE.

2. The Emphasis on the Study of the Scriptures Together with the Growth of Popular Piety

Another encouraging element of the propositions is the stress given to the role of the Bible. “In the context of the NE every opportunity for the study of Sacred Scripture should be made available. The Scripture should permeate homilies, catechesis and every effort to pass on the faith” (n. 11). This openness reiterates the attitude of Vatican II with regards to the Bible, although the Synod later makes it clear that “The Catechism of the Catholic Church and its Compendium are, above all, a resource for teaching the faith and supporting adults in the Church in their evangelizing and catechizing mission” (n. 29). According to the Synod, then, the Scriptures need to be read always in the light of the Catechism.

            What is more striking, however, is the parallel encouragement to the various forms of popular piety without suggesting their need to be corrected by Scripture. “Popular piety is a true place to encounter Christ, and also expresses the faith of the Christian people in the Blessed Virgin Mary and the Saints. The NE recognizes the value of these faith experiences and encourages them as ways to grow in Christian virtue … Popular piety is an especially promising opportunity for conversion and the growth of faith” (n. 39). So the NE is implemented by the study of the Bible and the popular devotions. How the two can be reconciled is difficult to understand apart from the Catholic dialectics between what is new and what is old.

3. The Importance of Conversion within the Sacramental System of the Church

The Synod comes very close to a kind of “Evangelical” language when it speaks about conversion. “The ‘first proclamation’ (i.e. an explicit announcement of salvation) is where the kerygma, the message of salvation of the paschal mystery of Jesus Christ, is proclaimed with great spiritual power to the point of bringing about repentance of sin, conversion of hearts and a decision of faith” (n. 9). This is straightforward language that any evangelist would use in his preaching (apart from the reference to the “paschal mystery” which is the typical Roman Catholic way of condensing and conflating the sacrifice of the cross and the sacrifice of the Eucharist).

            Conversion, however, is seen as a step within the wider sacramental path of a person. It is not the transition from being lost to being saved, but one move forward towards the fullness of an already given grace by and through the sacramental system of the Church (nn. 4, 33, 35, 37). This is not to say that conversion has to be pitted against the sacraments, but that the Roman Catholic meaning of conversion has far more ecclesiological weight and overtones than the simple turning to Christ and being saved by His grace alone.

4. A Self-Encouraging Tone with Little Self-Criticism

The overall tone of the propositions and the final Message of the Synod is aimed at providing a picture of a living and lively Church that responds to the challenges of the secularizing tendencies of the West by way of launching the NE and calling the baptized who have gone astray back to the Church. The propositions have little if nothing to say about the responsibilities of the Church in the erosion of Christian practice in the West and the lack of credibility that Christian institutions have in the public’s opinion. There is only one instance where “the scandals affecting priestly life and ministry” are mentioned (n. 49), but that is all. The general message is that many people left the Church because of the nasty effects of secularization. It seems that Church has little to repent for from past practices and much to commend itself for for its on-going activities. We will see if and how Pope Ratzinger will be bolder than the propositions are in recognizing the faults of the Church, especially in the West.

            A selective reading of the propositions may suggest that the Synod has clearly pushed the Roman Catholic Church into a more “Evangelical” mood. A more careful and broader reading, however, indicates that the “new” that is put forward is always accompanied by the “old” that remains.

Leonardo De Chirico

leonardo.dechirico@ifeditalia.org

Rome, 31^st October 2012

Pope Benedict XVI is about to inaugurate the Year of Faith that will mark the 50^th anniversary of the beginning of the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) and the 20^th anniversary of the publication of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. These two anniversaries have been put under the aegis of the Year of Faith and against the background of the New Evangelization which will be the theme of the imminent Synod of Bishops (7-28 October).

            In conjunction with the beginning of the Year of Faith, there are two events that deserve attention: the entrusting to Mary of the Year of Faith by Pope Ratzinger and the newly granted indulgences for those who will take part in it. The Year of Faith will have strong Marian connotations and will be accompanied by indulgences. Both instances reflect deeply felt dimensions of the Catholic faith.

1. A Year Placed in the Hands of the Mother of God

Anniversaries and symbolic actions are important for Roman Catholicism. Fifty years ago, right before opening the first session of Vatican II, Pope John XXIII made a pilgrimage to Loreto to entrust the Council to Mary’s care. Loreto is a small city in central Italy where, according to tradition, is located the house where Mary received the annunciation and lived in Nazareth and was taken after being miraculously preserved from destruction. This Marian shrine, also called the “Holy House”, is one of the most important places of Marian devotion in Europe.

            Just as Pope John XIII went to Loreto in 1962, so too did Benedict XVI on 4^th October to entrust to Mary the Year of Faith that is meant to celebrate Vatican II. Ideally, then, as Vatican II was brought under Mary’s motherly care, so the Year of Faith begins with the same Marian connotation.

            During his homily at the Marian shrine in Loreto, the Pope reflected on particular Marian themes using powerful analogies to illustrate the exemplar significance of Mary and to nurture Marian devotion. As the shrine is a “physical, tangible witness to the greatest event in our history, the Incarnation”, so Mary is the “place of his presence, a place of dwelling for the Son of God”. Mary is a “living house, the temple” of the Son of God; “where God dwells, all are at home”. Catholicism is very sensitive to the physicality of the faith, although the Pope never refers to the fact that this house is not the “real” house of Mary, but a medieval building that was fictionally attributed to Mary.

            Benedict XVI also said that Mary is the mother of Christ and our mother in the sense that “she opens to us the door of her home”. The living house becomes our home where we are always welcomed, and the host of the house becomes the mother who always loves us. Powerful images are evoked and profound emotions are touched. Marian imagery sparks deep human sentiments. The Roman Catholic ability to develop and enrich the world of images is proverbial. The standing issue is what exactly is warranted biblically and what are the limits for these developments so they don’t become self-referential ends in themselves. As a matter of fact, the Year of Faith begins with a strong Marian tone, as did Vatican II and all other official Roman Catholic events.

2. The Year of Faith and Indulgences

The second event that is worth noting at the beginning of the Year of Faith is the decree by the Vatican Penitentiary, i.e. the Vatican Tribunal that deals with absolutions, dispensations and indulgences, and that disciplines the granting of indulgences during the coming Year. Plenary remissions of temporal punishment will be granted to all those who, after confession and Communion, follow at least three lectures on Vatican II or the Catechism in a church context, or make a pilgrimage to a Papal basilica or cathedral, or take part in a Mass on specific dates, or go back to the church where they were baptized to renew their baptismal vows.

            This decree demonstrates that the apparatus of an old medieval practice is still in place and is a constant companion of the Church that remembers Vatican II and promotes the New Evangelization. Apart from its Marian piety, this is another defining feature of Roman Catholicism: new initiatives, like the New Evangelization in the context of the Year of Faith, are not taken at the expense of past traditions of the Church, but in continuity with them, even with those which have been and are strongly opposed by other Christians for the sake of the Gospel. In Rome nothing is lost, everything is embraced.

            The terms “faith” and “evangelization” will be central in the coming year and will appear to be very close, if not the same, to the way Evangelical Protestants use them. However, any interpreter and observer of the Year of Faith will need to remember that they always convey the full display of Roman Catholic doctrine, spirituality and practices, not a selection of those according to one’s own preference.

Leonardo De Chirico

leonardo.dechirico@ifeditalia.org

Rome, 8^th October 2012

Three Evangelical Protestant Evaluations in the Aftermath of the Council

Vatican II (1962-1965) is widely regarded as one of the most significant events of the Twentieth century. October 11^th will mark the 50^th anniversary of its beginning and the “Year of Faith” that Benedict XVI is about to open officially will be a year-long opportunity to reflect on its legacy.

            Coming to terms with Vatican II is not a task for Roman Catholics alone. Even non Roman Catholic Christians are called to grapple with it. Their perception of present-day Roman Catholicism heavily depends on the way in which they interpret Vatican II.

During and after the Council, there were three Evangelical Protestant theologians who dealt with it at length and in detail. These three approaches are perhaps indicative of different Evangelical readings of Vatican II which have in turn contributed to the shaping of three ways of relating to Rome as a whole.

1. Gerrit Berkouwer and the New Catholicism

Gerrit Berkouwer (1903-1996) was a Dutch Reformed theologian who had a first-hand experience at Vatican II as an official observer on behalf of the “Gereformeerde Kerken”. This experience gave rise to the writing of his book The Second Vatican Council and the New Catholicism (1965) which he wrote even though the proceedings of the Council were still in progress and the two main ecclesiological documents (Lumen Gentium and Gaudium et Spes) had not yet been approved.

According to Berkouwer, Vatican II is heavily indebted to the Nouvelle théologie (i.e. the new theology) which he had already surveyed in his 1958 book Recent Developments in Roman Catholic Thought. The Council might be thought of as being the cautious acceptance, even with its tensions and conflicts, by the official Church of the agenda proposed by the “new” theologians which had been opposed by the Curia in previous years.

The “New Catholicism” that Berkouwer envisages is based on ressourcement, i.e. re-appreciation of biblical and patristic sources, and aggiornamento, i.e. an attitude marked by an openness towards inner renewal and new ways of relating to the world.

If Berkouwer’s pre-Vatican II book Conflict with Rome (1958) centered on the gulf between Catholic and Protestant theologies concerning the doctrine of grace, his post-Vatican II New Catholicism revolves around the doctrine of the Church as the real issue still standing between them. Of course, Berkouwer is fully aware that these new emphases do not replace old ones but are simply added to the traditional Roman Catholic outlook, thus making the ecumenical agenda with Rome easier on the one hand, but more nuanced on the other. Before such a scenario, Berkouwer calls for a “realistic ecumenicity” – an ecumenicity which would overcome past polemical attitudes while awaiting further developments within Roman Catholicism.

2. David Wells and the Evangelical Puzzlement

Back in the Seventies, David Wells (b. 1939) was one of the few Evangelical theologians grappling with Roman Catholicism in the aftermath of the Council. In later years, Wells’ focus has progressively turned to another field of research, namely Evangelicalism itself, and this move has left a significant gap in Evangelical reflection on Roman Catholicism.

His book Revolution in Rome (1972) well epitomises an Evangelical sense of puzzlement before the aggiornamento proposed by the Council. The main thrust of his reading of the Council is the observation that Vatican II on some strategic points seems to endorse “mutually incompatible theologies”, one conservative, the other progressive; one restating tradition, the other pushing beyond tradition. These two conflicting tendencies can be found everywhere in Vatican II texts and contribute to the shaping of its overall theology marked by an unmistakably Catholic “both-and” pattern.

Confronted with the inherent stereophony, if not cacophony, of Vatican II, Wells argues that the Council has practised the “juxtaposition of ideas” in such a way that the reception and interpretation of the final redaction of the documents can be traced both along traditional lines as well as along more innovative ones. The main problem in coming to grips with Roman Catholicism is a hermeneutical one, namely “which interpretation is correct?”, “how do we interpret?”, which is all linked to the issue of magisterial authority: “who speaks for Rome today?” From the outlook of Vatican II, Rome appears to have a “divided mind”, as the titles of the chapters of Revolution in Rome clearly shows: “Authority: inward or outward?”, “God: in the earthly or heavenly city?”, “Christianity: a broad or narrow definition?”, “the Church: the people or the pope?”

The book testifies to the Evangelical perplexity in coming to terms with the complexity of the Catholic mindset. Before the interpretative crux of Vatican II, Wells propounds for the view that the Council depicts a temporary and transient balance which will eventually lead to the affirmation of one party over the other. In other words, “wait-and-see” what is going to happen. Meanwhile, Evangelical Protestants need to construe a “new apologetic” in their understanding of Catholicism, because the old apologetic pattern does not fit Rome any longer.

3. Herbert Carson and The Semper Eadem Thesis

In the British scene, the writings of Herbert Carson (d. 2004) well represent the less academic but strongly apologetic way of looking at Rome. His books on Catholicism (Roman Catholicism Today, 1964; Dawn or Twilight? A Study of Contemporary Roman Catholicism, 1976; The Faith of the Vatican, 1996) can be considered as a single, revised and updated work whose main interpretative thrust and theological critique remain constant even when he interacts with different phases of recent Catholic history and theology.

Carson reads Vatican II in terms of the semper eadem thesis, i.e. always the same. The theological structure of Rome may have changed in its linguistic covering but not in its fundamental orientation. According to him, in spite of all appearance suggesting differently, Vatican II has in no way modified its Tridentine, anti-Reformation stance for the simple reasons that, firstly, it has not formally and openly abandoned it and, secondly, the new teaching can be fully harmonised with the old without subverting it. Carson observes that “the tone may be friendlier, and the presentation more acceptable to late twentieth-century readers, yet the decrees of Trent are still there”, particularly as far as transubstantiation, justification by faith and purgatory are concerned. The inevitable conclusion of such a reading is that if Rome is semper eadem, the Evangelical approach to Roman Catholicism will always be the same as well.

After Vatican II, Evangelical Protestants dealt with it in three different ways: Rome really changed (Berkouwer), Rome still has to decide where to stand (Wells), Rome is always the same (Carson). Subsequent Evangelical approaches to Rome depended on which reading of Vatican II was preferred.

Leonardo De Chirico

leonardo.dechirico@ifeditalia.org

Rome, 24^th September 2012

 September 3rd, 2012

The recent death of Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini (1927-2012) provides an opportunity to reflect on wider Roman Catholic trends. He has been one of the most attractive and yet polarizing figures of the last thirty years. Jesuit, scholar, archbishop, popular writer, sought-after opinion leader, he has unwittingly created tensions between his numerous fans both inside and outside of religious circles and his vocal critics in the more conservatives sectors of the Roman Catholic Church. Even his death has seen the two parties commenting on it very differently. Martini’s biography in itself is a trajectory which epitomizes some of the key features of post-Vatican II Roman Catholicism, e.g. the Biblical renewal, the openness to the modern world, and the alleged inner conflicts within high-ranking Roman Catholic hierarchy.

1. The Biblical Scholar

Born in Turin in 1927, he entered the Jesuit order in 1944 and was ordained priest in 1952. Martini’s career started in the academy as a New Testament scholar. Professor of textual criticism (1962-1969) and then Rector (1969-1978) of the Pontifical Biblical Institute in Rome (1969-1978), he was eventually appointed Rector of the famous Jesuit Gregorian University (1978). He was able to lecture in Latin, Italian, English and French. Apart from mastering these languages, he also spoke German, Portuguese, Spanish and modern Greek. He could professionally read ancient Greek, Hebrew, Coptic, Aramaic, Syrian, and Arab. He successfully combined intellectual brightness and hieratic attitudes.

            What gives him international reputation is his work in the Committee of the United Bible Societies that lead to the third critical edition of the New Testament text (UBS3) in 1975, though he also participated at the Committee for the second edition. His name together with Aland, Black, Metzger and Wikgren is on the frontispiece of the dark read cover edition of the UBS text that many theological students and practitioners both fear and enjoy opening. His scholarly work is not extensive but gives rise in his later career to dozens of books of Biblical meditations which sell great. He seems to embody the contents of Dei Verbum, one of the major texts of Vatican II calling the Roman Catholic Church to the Word of God.

2. The Archbishop of Milan

In 1979, Pope John Paul II called him to become the Archbishop of Milan, the largest Roman Catholic diocese in the world and one of the “natural” sees for future popes. He had never had direct pastoral experience before, but his reputation opened the way for him. He centered his ministry on some innovative and controversial initiatives, e.g. the “School of the Word” where he invited all kinds of people to preach and lecture on the Bible and the “Chair of the Non-believers” where he invited atheists and agnostics to debate right there in Milan’s cathedral.

            He soon became the “hero” of the left-wing, progressive party of the Roman Catholic Church, though he never officially endorsed such a role. Those who are uncomfortable with the rigidity of Catholic ethics and discipline, be they Catholic or secular, be they intellectuals or celebrities, are attracted by his winsome erudition. Some of his positions appear to be different from those of John Paul II and the then Cardinal Ratzinger: for example, Martini desired the softening of the Catholic stance on non-married couples, even same-sex unions, on abortion, on the banning of divorced people from the Eucharist, on end-of-life ethics, on divorce, etc. He went as far as publicly invoking a new Council that would deal with these issues. His views never abruptly questioned the mainstream position, but were well articulated and argued for with intellectual subtlety. They are still appealing to many wandering people, and they are appalling to those with right-wing, conservative views.

3. A Runner for Papacy?

A curious relationship between John Paul II (together with Ratzinger) and Martini developed over the years. For some time he was counted among the possible candidates to become Pope. Sectors of the Roman Catholic Church rallied either around him or against him. Officially, though, Martini was always appreciative of the reigning Pope and John Paul II, and never gave signs of criticism.  The nickname he earned, the “Anti-Pope” (i.e. against the Pope), was a caricature and should instead be changed to “Ante-Pope” (i.e. one going before the Pope, opening ways for him). According to some observers, Martini’s positions, which today are quite controversial, will in the near future become the standard Roman Catholic view.

Wojtyła’s papacy lasted too long and Martini lost his chance to become Pope. When John Paul II died in 2005, Martini was frail in his health. Parkinson’s already had a grip on him. On the first ballot he received a few votes, but he told his supporters not to continue voting for him. Out of that conclave, Cardinal Ratzinger, the strong theologian of John Paul II, became Pope. Martini’s party, it seems, has been defeated for the time being, though Roman Catholic cycles are not easily predictable in the long run. He then retired to Jerusalem, but until his death remained a sought-after ecclesiastical spokesperson who urged the Church to be “human”, “modest” and “compassionate”. Will these terms become the main vocabulary of the future Roman Catholic Church?

4. The Dialectics of Catholicity

According to public opinion Martini represents a view that is polar opposite than that of John Paul II and Benedict XVI in the Roman Catholic world. The former has been called “liberal”, “progressive”, “democratic”, “left-wing”, while the latter have been labeled as “conservative”, “traditional”, “authoritarian”, “right-wing”. With these conventional categories, one could map the entire Roman Catholic spectrum. 

            As a matter of fact, the public opinion needs to find polarizations, needs to put one figure against another and needs to find conflicts within a given social body. Many times these polarizations reflect reality, others simply project oppositions that are not there. In the case of Martini, both observations are true. They are true because Roman Catholicism is based on multiple on-going tensions that sway one way or another but are meant to be kept in balance. In other words, John Paul II needed Martini and Martini needed John Paul II. The first maintained balance, while the second explored new fields. Martini spoke to the center-left, while Wojtyła spoke to the center-right, so that the whole spectrum was covered. Roman Catholicism as a whole needs both the defender of the already given balance and the explorer of new settlements.

            In the Roman Catholic system, the Pope is supposed to fight against “anti-popes”, but is likely to encourage “ante-popes” that would stretch the Roman Catholic synthesis further, so that what is now felt as disturbing avant-garde will be center-stage tomorrow. In this sense, the “ante-pope” Martini who arrived too late to become Pope will perhaps serve as a model for future Popes.

Leonardo De Chirico

leonardo.dechirico@ifeditalia.org