Category: Vatican Files English

Is there a specifically Roman Catholic way of doing theology? What are its defining marks? These questions form the background of a 36-page document recently released by the International Theological Commission (ITC). It took 8 years for the Commission to elaborate on it. This long gestation perhaps indicates the difficult task that ITC embarked in drafting the text entitled Theology Today: Perspectives, Principles and Criteria.

Since 1969 the role of the ITC has been to assist the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in examining doctrinal questions and offering insights on various theological issues. The document is helpful because it provides an insider and succinct perspective on what theology as a whole looks like in Vatican eyes.

After observing that true Catholic theology reflects unity (not uniformity) in diversity (not fragmentation),  the document stresses the fact that theology has three main features: “it arises from listening to the Word of God”, “it situates itself consciously and faithfully in the communion of the Church”, and “it is orientated to the service of God in the world”. The most interesting sections of the document are the first two in that they touch on sensitive theological issues that are crucial for other theological traditions as well.

1. A “Living” View of the Word of God

What strikes an Evangelical reader first and foremost is the prominent reference to the Word of God given in the document. In Catholic theology, the expression “Word of God” has a wide, elastic, and dynamic meaning, far beyond the contours of the written Word of the Bible. ICT reminds that Christianity is not a “religion of the book”, but a “religion of the word of God”. The former is “a written and mute word”, the latter is “the incarnate and living Word” (7). A sharp distinction is made between the written Word and the living Word as if the two could be possibly polarized. The Catholic Word contains both the Scriptures “as an inspired testimony to revelation” and “the Church’s living Tradition” (8). Scripture and Tradition constitute the “supreme rule of faith”.

            ICT wants us to appreciate once more what is the standard Roman Catholic theology of the Word of God after Vatican II. The Bible is certainly important, but the Bible is only part of a wider and living Tradition that is proclaimed faithfully “only on the foundation of the apostles and in apostolic succession” (10). Both the doctrinal foundation laid by the apostles and the on-going apostolic ministry exercised by the hierarchy are necessary to have access to the Word of God. The Magisterium of the RC Church is therefore essential in order to have the full Word of God.

2. Tradition as the Word of God

The idea of Tradition is paramount for ICT and is perhaps the highest indicator of what it means for a theology to be Roman Catholic theology. Tradition is defined as a complex whole with various vital components: “a constantly renewed study of sacred Scripture, liturgical worship, attention to what the witnesses of faith have taught through the ages, catechesis fostering growth in faith, practical love of God and neighbor, structured ecclesial ministry and the service given by the magisterium to the Word of God” (26).

The whole Roman Catholic Church is inherently involved in Tradition. In a sense, the Church is so immersed in Tradition that it cannot possibly be corrected by the Scriptures. The Church is so inextricably a part of Tradition that the Bible cannot be above the Church. Since the Bible is part of Tradition and the Church is also part of Tradition, the Bible is submitted to the Tradition of which the Church is the present-day and living voice. In a telling statement, the ICT document says that “Scripture is the first member of the written tradition” (30), implying that there are other members of the same tradition which come after and which define tradition inasmuch as Scripture. The difference is that the “living” voice of the magisterium has the last say whereas the “written” one is just one of the past components of Tradition.

3. Theology and magisterium

It comes as no surprise to read that “fidelity to the Apostolic Tradition is a criterion of Catholic theology” (32). While research is encouraged in all directions, “dissent towards the magisterium has no place in Catholic theology” (41). The magisterium has been given the charisma veritatis certum (i.e. the sure charism of truth) to which theology must submit (33). The role of theology is therefore to investigate and articulate the faith of the Church, but it is the magisterium that “proclaims the faith and authentically interprets it” (38).

Theology Today offers an honest sketch of what it means doing theology the Roman Catholic way. Dei Verbum and Lumen Gentium (i.e. two foundational documents of Vatican II) are the main pillars as far as the doctrines of Revelation and the Church are concerned. The task of theology lies between the two. The document presents nothing new, but is just a restatement of post-Vatican II magisterial views and concerns.

Leonardo De Chirico

leonardo.dechirico@ifeditalia.org

Rome, 13^th March 2012

Opening the Pontifical Yearbook is not an easy task. This thick book of more than 2350 pages contains all sorts of information about who’s who in the Vatican and what happens there. Despite the practical problems of handling it, it is nonetheless a mine of precious information about the center of the RC Church and the Vatican city.

For example, one reads that the official titles of the Pope are the following: “Bishop of Rome”, “Vicar of Jesus Christ”, “Successor of the prince of the Apostles” (i.e. Peter), “Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church”, “Primate of Italy”, “Archbishop and Metropolitan of the Roman Province”, “Sovereign of the State of the Vatican City”. The last title, “Servant of God’s servants”, is in stark contrast with the grandeur of the previous ones.

1. Absolute Power, with one Exception

The list of papal titles is somewhat astonishing and covers religious offices, political tasks and organizational responsibilities. He is one of the last examples of absolute sovereignty. In his person, the executive, legislative, and juridical powers are all concentrated. Until he dies, the Pope remains the Pope. The only restriction on his power is that he cannot choose his own successor. In other words, the papacy is not a family dynasty. This task is given to the College of electing cardinals, i.e. cardinals who are under 80 years old and who gather in “conclave” (from the Latin cum clave, i.e. locked up with a key) in the Sistine Chapel to vote on the new Pope.

This is not to say that the reigning Pope does not influence the vote for the election of the next one. Actually, although he will not be present (!), he has a strategic role to play. As a matter of fact, the Pope has the authority to select the new cardinals. So in choosing the new “princes” of the RC Church, he shapes the College that will vote his successor. This gives him a real, albeit indirect influence on the selection process of the next Pope. By way of analyzing the chosen members of the College (i.e. their spiritual weight and ecclesiastical provenance) it is therefore possible to paint a somewhat accurate and likely picture of who the next pope will be.

 

2. The New “Northren” Cardinals

On February 18^th, Pope Ratzinger “created” (this is the technical verb) 22 new cardinals, although only 18 of them became part of the electing College because they are under 80. The College is then made up of 125 cardinals, a number that will decrease in a short time because some of its members will turn 80 soon and therefore will be excluded from it.

            Let’s have a look at the geographical map of the College. What appears interesting is the proportion between the macro-regions. On the one hand, there are 67 Europeans (more than half of the College), and if we add the North-Americans and the only Oceanian, the number of the cardinals coming from the Northern part of the globe is 83 out of 125. On the other hand, the number of Latin American, African and Asian cardinals is only 41. Nearly two thirds of the College comes from the ancient, established, powerful churches of the West, although most of these churches are currently facing a long-term phase of decline. Only one third of the College comes from Southern churches which are younger, less traditional, perhaps poorer, but are growing in terms of practice and number of vocations to the priesthood.

Thus the College now reflects more the “older” face of the RC Church than its “new” profile. It is a College with a distinct Ratzingerian face. Does it mean that Pope Ratzinger wishes his successor to be a Northern Pope that will share his emphasis on calling the West back to the RC Church? Does it mean that the secular West will be the primary item on the next Pope’s agenda as it is in Benedict XVI’s one?

3. The Power of the Curia

The other interesting feature to consider is the role of the electing cardinals. After the creation of the 22 new ones, 44 of them now belong to the Roman Curia. In other words, they are high ranking ecclesiastical figures who live in Rome and lead various Vatican departments but do not have direct pastoral roles. They bring to the Church a more “Roman” perspective than a “catholic” (i.e. universal) one. Whereas bishops around the world have first-hand experience in leading a church even at the parish and grass-roots level, the Roman Curia has a more “political”, self-referential culture.  Generally speaking, they are more able diplomats than preachers and pastors. Their expertise is more in canon law than in missiology.

            Summing up these two indicators, here is a possible portrayal of the next Pope: a Northern cardinal with a distinct “Roman” soul. Perhaps the next Pope will be totally different, but at least this portrayal corresponds well to Benedict XVI’s own outlook.

 

 

Leonardo De Chirico

leonardo.dechirico@ifeditalia.org

 

Rome, 20^th February 2012

The New Evangelization is the buzzword for much of what happens at the Vatican. It could well become the catchword of Ratzinger’s entire pontificate given the attention that is receiving. Benedict XVI instituted a new Pontifical Council in 2010 entirely dedicated to the New Evangelization. The latter is mentioned in nearly all his speeches and is slowly but steadily becoming the overarching theme of many projects sponsored by the Vatican.

            The President of the newly created Vatican department, Msgr. Rino Fisichella, has just published a book (La nuova evangelizzazione, Milano: Mondadori, 2011) where he spells out the significance of the New Evangelization and offers an interesting perspective on the direction that this initiative is going to take. Fisichella was professor of Fundamental Theology (i.e. the RC way of defining a discipline between Apologetics and Systematic Theology) for many years and then Rector of the Lateran Pontifical University, one of the major and most prestigious academic institutions in Rome. After spending much of his life reflecting on the often turbulent relationship between faith and the modern world, Benedict XVI called him to lead the Vatican efforts towards mobilizing the RC Church towards the New Evangelization. From the chair to the square, so to speak.

1. What the New Evangelization is About

Fisichella makes clear that the New Evangelization applies to those countries where the RC Church was established in ancient times and where the first proclamation of the Gospel resounded many centuries ago. He acknowledges the fact that the word “evangelization” and the vocabulary around it has been treated with suspicion in RC circles due to its “protestant” usage and overtones. Mission and catechesis were more traditional and preferred terms for a long time. It is only after Vatican II that the language of evangelization began to be used.

            The expression “New Evangelization” was coined by John Paul II in 1979 and subsequently achieved a technical theological meaning. Its specificity has to do with its recipients, i.e. the masses that have been baptized in the RC Church but have “lost a living sense of their faith”. The goal of the New Evangelization is to call them back to the mother church.

2. Why the New Evangelization is Needed

Fisichella embarks on the attempt of analyzing what has caused such a transition to practical unbelief. The root of the Western crisis is the transformation of the process of secularization in a strong movement towards secularism. The former is a sociological process which reflects pluralism, the latter is a new dogmatic religion which is anti-Christian. This new stance forgets the rich “synthesis between Greek-Roman thought and Christianity” and replaces it with an ideology of religious indifference and relativism. In a telling comment, Fisichella argues that “the pathology that afflicts the world today is cultural” and is to be entirely attributed to secularism.

            This is a standard reading of Western cultural trends from a traditional point of view. What is striking in Fisichella’s otherwise nuanced reconstruction is the lack of self-criticism as far as the RC Church is concerned. It seems that the charge of the present-day crisis lies in secularism only, whereas churches seem to bear no responsibility. Even when he deplores the profound ignorance that most people show as far as the tenets of the Christian faith is concerned, he skips over the rather obvious point about who is to blame (at least partially but truly) for it. Are we sure that European churches do not bear any responsibility in today’s spiritual and cultural crisis, especially when they claim to have 70%, 80%, 90% of baptized in most countries? Isn’t there something wrong in their theology of Christian initiation? Isn’t there a problem in their catechetical impact? Isn’t there something awkward in their witness to the Gospel? In the end, are churches blameless in the Western spiritual turmoil? For Fisichella, the issue is not even mentioned.

3. New Evangelization … New Humanism

The New Evangelization is needed because the West has turned away from its Christian roots and it is time to reverse the tide. According to Fisichella, the battle ground is cultural, the issue at stake is anthropological, the task before the Church is to promote a New Humanism, i.e. a more advanced synthesis between Christian values and the Greek-Roman heritage through the rediscovery of the virtue of coherence on the part of Christians. The New Evangelization will be a means to achieve this ambitious goal, a goal that Benedict XVI wholly embraces and proactively spearheads.

So far, the narrative of the New Evangelization does not contain crucial biblical words like repentance from past and present mistakes, confession of sin, conversion to Jesus Christ. If the New Evangelization is to bear its fruit there is no other way than the biblical one.

 

Leonardo De Chirico

leonardo.dechirico@ifeditalia.org

 

Rome, 7^th February 2012

The life of a reigning Pope is punctuated by several speeches to deliver on all kinds of occasions. Yet not all speeches have the same weight. Some are more important than others for a variety of reasons, including biographical ones. The speech that Benedict XVI addressed to the Plenary meeting of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on January 27^th belongs to a special type of event.

Founded as the Inquisition to fight against heresies and errors both inside and outside the Church, this institution was subsequently given the task to help the Pope to “strengthen the brothers” according to Luke 22:32, that is promoting RC orthodoxy and taking action against deviations from it.

In his long career at the service of the RC Church, Ratzinger was Prefect of the same Congregation from 1981 to his election to the papal office in 2005. For during the time throughout John Paul II’s reign, he has acted as the chief “enforcer” of the faith, as summarized by his biographer John L. Allen. So, this address to the members of the Congregation that he had lead for nearly 25 years was no ordinary task. For he knows very well both the structure, the people, and the issues that the Congregation is dealing with.

            The theme of this year’s Plenary meeting was ecumenism so Benedict XVI touched on some of the current ecumenical challenges for the RC Church.

1. What ecumenism is not

Before entering the analysis of present-day trends, Ratzinger says that the RC involvement in ecumenical affairs is to be “coherent” with regard to Vatican II and the “entire Tradition” of the Church. Ecumenism stems from what the RC Church believes in its dogmatic outlook, for it has no other theological framework than the traditional teachings. In light of this remark, the Pope argues that present-day ecumenism runs into two potential pitfalls: “false irenicism” and  “indifferentism”. The former lowers the contentious points for the sake of peace but at the expense of truth; the latter downplays truth and faith and elevates other criteria as primary driving reference points for unity.

The outcome of both “false irenicism” and “indifferentism” is that ecumenism becomes the attempt to draft a “social contract” whereby the parties involved negotiate patterns of relationship and common action. If this is the case, ecumenism deviates into a “praxis-ology”, i.e. a discourse exclusively revolved on practices aimed at creating a better world.

Although this is not the language of the Pope, one can say that unity runs the risk of becoming an idol, an absolute, a self-referential project that makes unity a means to its own ends. There is a tendency in ecumenical circles to become so passionate about unity to the point of forgetting that unity is not an isolated item in God’s plan for the church and the cosmos. Biblical unity is always qualified by truth even though it may lead to recognize lasting fundamental differences with other people. Here Ratzinger does not talk about Biblical unity. The unity he envisages is a kind of unity which is coherent with RC tradition which he defines as “the Divine truth that speaks to us through the Word of God”. In RC theology the Word of God is a very elastic and dynamic category including the written Bible, oral traditions, the magisterial teachings, and the living tradition of the Church. The Word of God is much more than Scripture alone. For Ratzinger, RC ecumenism is called to be coherent to the whole of this Biblical and extra-Biblical tradition.

The basic reference points between Evangelical and Roman Catholic views of unity are different, yet they find a convergence in being serious about questioning an ecumenism of “being nice” to one another and of “transforming the world together” (my expressions, not Ratzinger’s).

2. The Real, Central Issue

Beside expressing concerns about possible ecumenical pitfalls, Benedict XVI does not shy away from indicating what is the real issue in ecumenism today. Here it is important to be note that he is speaking to a Vatican institution whose task is to offer a theological service to the Church. So he is concentrating on the theological foundation of unity.

            “The crucial problem is the structure of Revelation – the relationship between Sacred Scripture, the living Tradition in the Holy Church and the Ministry of the Apostles’ successors as a witness to the true faith”. In a nutshell, the Pope provides a summary of the real ecumenical issue according to Roman Catholicism. It is the complex nexus between Revelation, Scripture, Tradition and the Church.

Revelation has its own “internal structure” which RC ecumenism should give voice to and preserve. Benedict summarizes it in a question form: “How does the truth of God come to us?”. The answer to this question contains the crux of ecumenism. The exegesis of this question should be the starting point and the guiding principle of any meaningful ecumenical dialogue. The issue is therefore ecclesiological, but it is much more than that. It goes directly to the heart of the RC vision touching on various fundamental doctrines all intertwined and organically connected.

            In some ecumenical circles, e.g. the Evangelicals and Catholics Together initiative, it is common to find people saying that Evangelicals and Catholics basically agree on the Triune God, Revelation, Salvation, and the moral Christian vision. What still divides them is the doctrine of the church. The tendency is to separate theologically the doctrines at stake as if they were unconnected pieces of a jig-saw. Here the Pope is saying something totally different. He is saying that ecclesiology depends on and is nurtured by a much wider theological vision. Ecclesiology is a reflection of Revelation which in turn is enacted in Scripture, in Tradition, and in the ministry of the Church. So ecclesiological differences are not merely ecclesiological but belong to the basic structure of the respective faiths.

            Interestingly, Ratzinger approvingly gives an example of a well pursued ecumenical dialogue according to RC principles. It is the recent provision for Anglo-Catholics who desire to be in full communion with the RC Church. There the “crucial problem” has been solved. Does he mean that other dialogues are intended to be stepping stones toward the same end?

Leonardo De Chirico

leonardo.dechirico@ifeditalia.org

Rome, 28^th January 2012

At the beginning of the new year, following the celebrations of Christmas and the Epiphany, the Pope meets the diplomatic body accredited to the Vatican and offers ambassadors from various countries his wishes for the new year as well as sketching a global road map that shows what is at stake in the world as far as the Vatican is concerned.

Not including its diplomatic relationships with international organizations, the Vatican has official relations with some 179 countries, second in number only to the United States of America. In 2011, agreements were reached with Malaysia and Azerbaijan, whereas those with Mozambique and Montenegro are still to be ratified. China and Saudi Arabia are the two major countries which still do not have diplomatic relations with the Vatican.

This is normal for a state entity. What is unique is the status of the Vatican, which combines both religious and political dimensions. Before turning to the Pope’s speech it is perhaps useful to put it in its institutional context.

1. Both Church and State

The Roman Catholic Church is the only church which is organically related to a sovereign state (i.e. the Vatican) with its own political, financial, juridical and diplomatic structure. It the only ecclesial body which deals with other states through the Vatican at a peer-level. When it signs agreements with a state in the form of a concordat, for instance, it does so according to the rules of international law as a sovereign country vis-à-vis another sovereign country. The Pope is both head of the church and head of state. When he visits a nation he is welcomed as if he were a king, not simply as archbishop or another ecclesiastical figure.

Though small and symbolic, the Church also has an army, like any other state. It cleverly plays with its double identity (ecclesial and political) which is the fruit of its long and complex history, but also an indication of its composite institutional nature: both church and state in one. Theology and politics are so intertwined in the system of the Catholic Church and in its activities that it is impossible to separate them.

Many Evangelical traditions are based on the principle of the separation between church and state and find it difficult to understand a church which is also a state and vice versa. Even those Evangelical traditions which are accustomed to a covenant-type of relationship between church and state still operate according to the principle that, theologically and institutionally, church and state are two very different entities. Not so for the Vatican, which is both. This uniqueness must be grasped in order to deal with RC issues at all.

2. From the Economic Crisis to Religious Freedom … with some Blind Spots

The speech of Benedict XVI surveys the global scene and the challenges the world is facing.

First, the Pope gives attention to the “global economic and financial crisis”. The ones who are most affected are the young. They are particularly in distress in North Africa and the Middle East. In this region the Pope explicitly mentions Syria, the Holy Land, and Iraq. The international community has to engage them in dialogue and aiming at reconciliation knowing that “the path of peace is at the same time the path of the young”. Education, family, and openness to life (i.e. pro-life behaviors) are the roads towards development for the younger generation. Although the Pope says that the crisis calls for “new rules which ensure that all can lead a dignified life and develop their abilities for the benefit of the community as a whole”, no remark here is made about the devastating distortions of the global economy and human responsibility in them.

The second pillar of Pope Benedict’s speech is religious freedom, “the first of human rights, for it expresses the most fundamental reality of the person”. After paying tribute to the murdered Pakistani Minister Shahbaz Bhatti, the Pope speaks of Christians deprived of fundamental rights and sidelined in public life in too many places of the world. Religiously motivated terrorism has also reaped many victims, especially in Asia and in Africa. In other unnamed parts of the world (perhaps Europe and the West?), policies tend to marginalize the role of religion in society. No remark is made about China notwithstanding the fact that two RC bishops are in prison, perhaps out of diplomatic prudence towards a very delicate situation.

 

3. Italy as example?

In closing the speech, the Pope makes reference to the 150^th anniversary of the unity of Italy as a nation (1861-2011). In this respect, he hopes that “Italy will continue to foster a stable relationship between Church and State, and thus serve as an example to which other nations can look with respect and interest”. From an Italian and Evangelical perspective, it is at least curios that Italy should be taken as example of church-state relationships. While religious freedom is granted by the Italian Constitution, the RC Church has a uniquely privileged status which is far higher than other religious communities. This legal privilege gives rise to many economic, social, political, and media benefits which would be utterly unthinkable in many Western nations.

Does the Pope mean that the (totally unfair) privileges that the RC Church enjoy in Italy should be extended elsewhere and become a model for other countries? If this is what it appears to be, the opposite should be affirmed instead. Italy is still in need to learn what religious freedom means in an advanced sense, and one major obstacle to achieving this is exactly the Church-State settlement which the Pope advocates for in this speech.

The tone of the speech is at the same time both very “catholic” (i.e. global in scope) and very “roman” (i.e. attached to a very peculiar point of view).

 

 

Leonardo De Chirico

leonardo.dechirico@ifeditalia.org

 

Rome, 16^th January 2012