Letter #45, 2016: A New Interview

Acasă > Ştiri > Arhiva Ştiri

Timp stanga: 0.03s...

Ştiri şi Evenimente

Letter #45, 2016: A New Interview

[2016-05-19]

[Engleză]

May 18, 2016, Wednesday -- Francis, His Interviews, and the "Re-Branding" of the Church

Francis Interviewed Again, This Time by La Croix, a French Paper...

"We need to speak of 'roots' in the plural because there are so many. In this sense, when I hear talk of the Christian roots of Europe, I sometimes dread the tone, which can seem triumphalist or even vengeful. It then takes on colonialist overtones." —Pope Francis, in a new interview with the Catholic newspaper La Croix, released two day ago, speaking about the extent to which European culture is (or is not) "rooted" in Christianity and the Christian faith

"It is true that the idea of conquest is inherent in the soul of Islam. However, it is also possible to interpret the objective in Matthew’s Gospel, where Jesus sends his disciples to all nations, in terms of the same idea of conquest." —Pope Francis, in the same interview, speaking about the fear of some in Europe of the consequences of millions of Muslim immigrants entering the continent

"Pope Bergoglio surprises always. He wishes to open in the Church some ways of discerning, some processes of study on the most delicate and controversial themes. Christianity is an ever-new event that requires surprises, requires new reflections. In this sense, yes, the Pope astonishes us greatly because he doesn't stop at the already known, at prejudices (pre-conceived opinions), at what one thinks one knows a priori about a question. Rather, he asks us to look beyond, so that the Spirit of God may be the guide of His Church in an ever-new way." —Cardinal Walter Kasper, in a May 13 interview in La Repubblica, speaking after the Pope on May 12 said he would open a new study of the question of deaconesses (link for the original Italian and link for excerpts in English translation)

"This time (in calling for a study of deaconesses) the pontiff surprised even me." —Kasper, in the same interview

“Prior to Pope Francis, when many people on the street were asked: ‘What is the Catholic Church all about? What does the Pope stand for?’ The response would often be, ‘Catholics, well they are against abortion, gay marriage and birth control.’” —Father Thomas Rosica of Toronto, Canada, Founder and CEO of the Salt and Light TV and the English-language spokesman for the Vatican Press Office in a talk in Brooklyn, New York, on May 11 (link)

“Today (since the election of Pope Francis) I dare say that the response is somewhat different. What do they say about us now? What do they say about the Pope? People are speaking about our leader who is unafraid to confront the sins and evils that have marred us. We have a Pope who is concerned about the environment, about mercy, compassion and love, and a deep passion, care and concern for the poor and for displaced peoples roaming the face of this earth. Pope Francis has won over a great part of the media.... He has changed the image of the Church so much that prestigious graduate schools of business and management are now using him as a case study in rebranding.” —Father Rosica, Ibid.

"Ultimately, I don’t expect much movement on female deacons. What will happen, though, is the continued battering down of any certainty that the Catholic faith is divinely revealed and immutable." —American Catholic writer and editor Steven Skojec, in a May 13 article on his website, onepeterfive.com, entitled "Female Deacons and The Hermeneutic of Perpetual Innovation"

"The sense of constant change, perpetual flux, in something that is supposed to be unyieldingly stable is a huge problem... The upshot of never-ending upheaval is nothing less than the crushing of faith and hope, the subsequent diminution of charity, and the loss of countless souls to despair. I wonder if Pope Francis and his friends, always excited about novelty, ever contemplate that fact." —Skojec, in the same article

"We must help the Pope. He is 'nostro papa' (our Dad). We must stand with him just as we would stand with our own father." —Cardinal Robert Sarah, Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, in a conversation with me in Washington, D.C., on Monday evening, May 16. Sarah is regarded as one of a group of more conservative cardinals who have at times seemed critical of certain dispositions of the Pope. On May 17, Sarah gave the keynote address at the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast in Washington (more on that speech in a later letter)

================================================

Image, Or Substance?

Pope Francis "has changed the image of the Church so much that prestigious graduate schools of business and management are now using him as a case study in rebranding."

With these words, Father Thomas Rosica, the Vatican spokesman for the English-language press for the past few years, offers an opportunity to raise the central question of this pontificate.

Rosica is saying that Francis is changing -- has changed -- the "image" of the Church.

He is praising Pope Francis for doing this with such remarkable flair and intelligence during his three years and two months as Pope that business professionals are now studying his methods in changing the image of such a vast, venerable institution as the Catholic Church.

Rosica is, in essence, saying that Francis is the greatest "salesman" of the Christian faith in the modern history of the Church.

So here is the question: Is Francis changing the image only, or, in changing the image, is he also changing, or beginning to change, the actual substance of the Church -- the very substance of the faith itself?

And, a corollary question: if such changes are not occurring, but there is a risk that they could occur, does Francis understand this?

Of course, the answers we give to these questions have profound consequences.

To try to express it more clearly, I'll rephrase the question, the dilemma.

If people outside the Church now think the Church is something "different" than they did before Pope Francis, is this because Francis has presented the same, unchanging truth in a more understandable way, or has something of this unchanging truth been altered to make the Church more attractive to her former detractors and critics?

Are we a "different" Church today than the Roman Catholic Church of Pius XII, of Pius X, of St. Thomas More, of St. Thomas Aquinas, of St. Francis, of St. Gregory the Great, of St. Augustine, of St. Paul?

Clearly, we are different in externals, in many ways -- in superficial things, in appearances, in contingent things, in externals.

Are there any differences in profound things, in substantial things, in things that we must sacrifice everything to preserve?

If the answer is that all the differences are in superficial, contingent, not fundamental, substantial things -- the correct answer, since, by our faith, the essential doctrines of the Church are immutable, unchanging, eternal -- then what we are dealing with in this pontificate is, yes, a breathtakingly brilliant effort to "rebrand" the Church, but the "item" in question is still essentially the same old "product" -- the once-handed down, ever-true Christian faith.

But if this is so, then those outside the Church, and inside the Church as well, who see the "rebranding" that is happening and regard it as revolutionary, as a rejection of foundational aspects of the deposit of the faith, are... mistaken.

If this is so, then the cereal has a new box, the vacuum cleaner a new package, but it is still the identical cereal, the identical vacuum cleaner.

There has been a "rebranding" of historic dimensions -- but no revolution in doctrine.

The Petrine Office

Except, in one area. An area on the borderline between accident and subtance, between what is marginal and what is essential.

That area is in the exercise of the Petrine office itself, the magisterial teaching office of the Pope.

Pope Francis throughout his pontificate has spoken freely to journalists, and audiences, in an unprecedented way.

He has, in fact, just done it again in a new, and, it must be said, very interesting and illuminating but also in some ways perplexing and even disturbing interview. (The entire text is posted below.)

Speaking so freely over the past three years and two months has resulted in a series of "unguarded" remarks which have defined this pontificate.

"Who am I to judge?" is the chief of these remarks, during the airplane interview on the way back from Brazil in the summer of 2013.

Another such remark came on his flight back from the Phillipines when Francis spoke about Christians not needing to "breed like rabbits."

In this latest interview (below), Francis suggests that to speak of the Christian roots of Europe "can seem triumphalist" and that "it is possible to interpret the objective" of Jesus' telling his disciples to go forth "to the ends of the earth" to convert the world to faith in the Blessed Trinity "in terms of the same idea of conquest" that is "inherent in the soul of Islam."

These various statements cane be examined, and turned upside down, and eventually one may find a way to understand them that preserves the traditional understanding of the Church. So the words are not necessarily "wrong."

But, whether right or wrong, these words are not "Magisterial," binding the conscience of anyone to assent to them, even though it is the "Magister" (the teacher, the Pope) who speaks them.

They are opinions on non-doctrinal matters, judgments about history (the conversion of Europe and its effects) and about how Christians and Muslims may have understood "Jihad" and "missionary activity."

These opinions may be interesting. They may give us an insight into the Pope's mind. One can intuit influences on his thinking, which is useful. So these words are genuine, fresh, authentic, not pre-scripted, not read on a teleprompter, and, speaking them, Francis rises in the estimation of many, as a person. Many applaud a Pope who speaks with such candor, light years distant from old manuals, uncircumscribed by traditional doctrinal definitions. But these opinions are not "Catholic teaching."

Here is the issue. The Pope, the final arbiter of doctrine in the Church, is on all other matters only one more voice among many. This means that, if he speaks a great deal publicly about matters which do not involve his Petrine doctrinal authority, there is a risk of confusion and even that the authoritativeness of his doctrinal declarations might in some way be diminished.

And, since the doctrinal authority of the Petrine office is a part of Catholic doctrine, the emphasis on non-doctrinal declarations and interviews could, arguably, present a potential risk to the long-term integrity of the Petrine office.

The Pope's Style

The Pope's style has provoked the question: Should Francis speak so often, at such length, and so unguardedly?

It is his style, he likes to do it, but could there be reasons to change this style?

The "Old Guard" in the Church, in the Vatican and in the hierarchy throughout the world, still remembers a time when the communications of the Pope were "guarded," literally.

The "guards" were his associates, the theologians and other officials of the Roman Curia, and others around the world whom the Curia might consult.

A papal text would be read and re-read. Passages which might be confusing were noted, adjusted, sometimes cut out entirely -- better, it was believed, to "cut the problem" than to leave room for possible confusion.

A Vatican monsignor once put it to me this way: "My job is to save the Pope from himself." (!!!)

Sursa: www.InsideTheVatican.com

Contor Accesări: 719, Ultimul acces: 2026-08-05 21:05:54

Timp total: 0.03s...

[]:1