Philosophy Behind "Deus Caritas Est"
Interview With Catholic University's Monsignor Sokolowski

WASHINGTON, D.C., FEB. 15, 2006 (Zenit.org).- The theology found in Benedict XVI's encyclical "Deus Caritas Est" draws on and blends with philosophical distinctions of love, and raises questions concerning social and political philosophy and anthropology.

So says Monsignor Robert Sokolowski, a professor of philosophy at the Catholic University of America and author of "Christian Faith and Human Understanding" (CUA Press).

He shared with ZENIT how the two parts of the encyclical engage philosophy in different ways, and how philosophy plays a role in theological reflection.

Q: What distinctly philosophical concepts has the Pope incorporated into his first encyclical, "Deus Caritas Est"?
Monsignor Sokolowski: Philosophy does have a role in the document; at one point in the encyclical the Holy Father speaks of his "somewhat philosophical reflections," and he also speaks about a "philosophical dimension" in the biblical vision of love.

The encyclical has two major sections. The first deals with the understanding of the place of love in creation and salvation history. The second deals with the practice of charity in the life of the Church.

In the first section, the Pope surveys a number of ways in which the word "love" is used. He examines contemporary usage, discusses the difference between "eros" and "agape" in Greek thought and in the Bible, and examines Hebrew words for love. He also discusses the difference between justice and love.

Most of this first section is theological: The Holy Father examines the Old Testament revelation of the love of God for his creation and his people, and the deepening of this revelation in the Incarnation and the New Testament.

The theology, however, draws on and blends with the philosophical distinctions one can make concerning human love as it is manifest to human reason, especially the difference between self-centered and benevolent love.

Some of our love is needful and possessive; we love what we need and want. This kind of love was called "amor concupiscentiae" in medieval thought.

But as we exercise our human rationality more deeply, we become capable of a benevolent and thoughtful kind of love, in which we go beyond our own needs and wants and love what is good for others and not just ourselves. We do so through the virtues of justice and friendship. This kind of love was called "amor benevolentiae."

These two Latin terms are used in the encyclical. The discussion of the difference between justice and love is also an important philosophical theme.

In the second section of the encyclical, which discusses the practical exercise of love in the Church, the Holy Father reminds us that active charity is essential to the Church: "The Church cannot neglect the service of charity any more than she can neglect the Sacraments and the Word." This is a strong statement.

In this section, several philosophical issues are raised: What is justice? How is justice related to charity? How are reason, the common good and natural law related to one another, and how is the Church able to clarify them?

As you know, in the 19th century both Auguste Comte and John Stuart Mill, in the wake of the Enlightenment and the French Revolution, wished to replace Christian faith and charity with the religion and love of humanity. Many of the charitable works of the Church were taken over by the state.

The Pope shows in the encyclical that this desire to imitate Christian religion and charity was already found in Julian the Apostate in the fourth century.

A major problem arises in the modern age when the state tries to take over all "charitable" works, because it might then try to govern the souls and minds of people as well; totalitarian regimes did not stop with bodily needs.

The Pope raises the question of how the Church is to carry out her essential work of charity in an age of technology and massive governmental activities. Will she become an agent of the government or exercise an independent role? How is this role to be defined? These questions engage social and political philosophy as well as philosophical anthropology.

Q: Why did Benedict XVI mention the philosophers Descartes and Nietzsche in an encyclical about love, both human and divine?
Monsignor Sokolowski: He also mentions Plato and Aristotle later in the encyclical.

Descartes is alluded to only in an anecdote, but Nietzsche is mentioned right at the beginning, as saying that Christianity has poisoned "eros." He is mentioned here to provide the counter-position to what the Pope wishes to show -- that Christianity does not neglect the deepest wants and needs of human beings.

The love that God reveals to us is not gnostic; it reaches into, heals and elevates all our desires, including those involved in sustenance and procreation.

The Pope uses Nietzsche in the way that St. Thomas Aquinas uses adversaries at the beginning of his treatment of a question: He presents the opposing view fairly as the sharp contrast to what he wants to show. Nietzsche is fundamentally unsound, of course, but he raises very good questions and is always a good foil for philosophical reflection.

Q: Does Benedict XVI adhere to a particular philosophical tradition in the way the Pope John Paul II was known as a Thomist and personalist?
Monsignor Sokolowski: I think that the work of Benedict XVI could be said to resemble the Christian Platonism one finds in the Fathers of the Church.

Also, his extensive and thoughtful survey of the various uses of words, in both current and historical texts and discourse, makes one think of Aristotle's and Heidegger's way of looking for philosophical phenomena in the way people speak about things.

Q: John Paul II's encyclicals were notable because of their strong philosophical foundation, which reflected his training. How does Benedict XVI's "Deus Caritas Est" compare in this regard?
Monsignor Sokolowski: Pope John Paul II was not only a philosopher but also an actor, and I think his sense for the dramatic is evident in his encyclicals. In "Veritatis Splendor," for example, the image of the rich young man gives a vivid and concrete focus to the document.

Benedict XVI's encyclical is less dramatic but very comprehensive, and it is particularly strong in its survey of the nuances of language in different contexts.

He emphasizes the continuity between human experience and divine revelation; he shows that God's word and love complete our human nature, but also go beyond it in ways that we could not have anticipated by our natural abilities alone.

Q: Philosophers have long noted that God is many things, particularly being, truth, beauty, goodness, and unity or oneness. What is the typical reaction of a philosopher upon hearing that "God is love"? How might a philosopher understand this concept?
Monsignor Sokolowski: It would be hard to say that "God is love" apart from the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. Even if one were to think that the deity is benevolent, one could still not say that it is love. That sort of divine love would be relative and not substantial in the deity.

Only because the Father gives everything to the Son, and because the Son and Father express their love in the Holy Spirit, can one say, with St. John, that God is love. I don't see how such an understanding of God could have arisen in philosophical thinking.

Q: What role does philosophy play in theological reflection?
Monsignor Sokolowski: It could be considered analogous to the role that mathematics plays in physics. Philosophy tries to arrive at truths that could not be otherwise -- truths that define the boundaries of things and the whole of things.

Theology based on Christian revelation introduces a revision of the whole of things: God is revealed and "understood" in a deeper way, the world is understood differently, and so are we. The ultimate truths that philosophy reaches are then seen in a new context, but their natural truth is not diluted or destroyed.

For example, one might reflect philosophically on what human choice and responsibility are. But these truths become more profoundly understood when we come to know, through faith, that we must make choices and take up responsibilities not just toward one another but toward the God who has spoken and acted toward us in Christ.

Q: Where does love fit into the philosophical discipline of natural theology, or any other area of philosophy where the question of God is addressed?
Monsignor Sokolowski: Love has been a theme in philosophy from the beginning; think of the role it has in Plato's dialogues. When Aristotle speaks about human happiness, he discusses various ways in which we desire and wish for things. Even the theoretic life is a good for us that we can love. Lucretius begins "De Rerum Natura" with a hymn to "alma Venus," who pervades and governs everything. Philosophy gets to ultimates and the good is among them, so our response to the good -- love -- is among the ultimates as well.

How far does this love reach? Is the love in human friendship its highest form? We can contemplate the universe but it seems inappropriate to say that we can love it. But if there is a first principle in the universe, and if it somehow knows us and is benevolent toward us, then a new kind of loving is not only fitting but somehow enjoined on us; we would be remiss and ungrateful if we failed in it.

But if we come to know that this first principle not only knows, loves and hears us, but also chose us to be and redeemed us by becoming one of us, then we would see that we could never respond to him properly by our own efforts; we could respond only through his grace and by sharing in his own love. This would be our participation in the life of the Holy Trinity, the gift of the Incarnation.

In last week's issue of the Tablet, Peter Henriot, SJ, who directs the Jesuit Centre for Theological Reflection in Lusaka, Zambia, discusses the social message in Deus caritas est.
---------------------------------------------------------------
11/02/2006
For the love of justice
Peter Henriot

Much of the reaction to Pope Benedict XVI’s first encyclical has dwelt on the practice of personal love and less on the practice of charity and social action. But both are crucial to the Pope’s powerful message, particularly amid the poverty of rural Africa.

WHAT DO eros and agape have to do with my everyday work for social justice here in Zambia? That’s the question that came to my mind when I picked up Benedict XVI’s first encyclical letter Deus Caritas Est . Was this just a pleasant theological/philosophical discourse about love without much relevance to the issues facing a Church struggling to share good news in a country with many potentials but also many problems? Would this letter make any difference on a continent where the justice, development and peace agenda is so central to our Catholic Church?

To be honest, I was somewhat concerned because I had heard some comments that the new Pope was not going to be as strong on the promotion of Church social activism based on social teaching as had been his predecessor, John Paul II. Some had even speculated that an emphasis on charity was now being made in order to put into second place an emphasis on justice . A stress on the role of the Church in sharing charitably with the poor would then move away from the Church’s political role of changing the structures of poverty.

My worry was put to rest in a careful reading of the document. I would say that the whole encyclical, not simply the second part which speaks of the “practice of love” in its social dimension, pushes forward the more radical aspects of the Church’s social teaching . If the first part of the letter speaks of a “mysticism” that is social in character, it lays a foundation for charitable activity of the Church that is necessarily orientated towards justice. And this, of course, continues with the best of the social teaching of the past century.

Let me set down what I see to be three major social theses of Deus Caritas Est and describe their implications. I look at these points from the particular perspective of a Jesuit priest serving in a small local language parish in a poor rural area and also directing a very active social research and advocacy centre in a Church strongly committed to justice. What does this encyclical say to me?

First, the entire activity of the Church “is an expression of a love that seeks the integral good of women and men … ”, promoting human beings in all arenas of life and attending to human sufferings and needs, including material needs. Hence the Church’s promotion of love is intimately compatible with the works of justice, development and peace that play such central roles in the mission of the Church in Zambia and throughout Africa (and wider). Some might argue that such pastoral activities should take second place behind more spiritual work such as liturgy and sacramental ministry. But Benedict argues differently: “The Church cannot neglect the service of charity any more than she can neglect the Sacraments and the Word.”

When the Pope’s vision of charity is seen in its widest sense as described above, then an integrated social activism is essential to the mission of the Church. For charity that attends only to alleviating suffering without attempting to do away with it is only partial love at best and destructive love at worst – something open to the Marxist critique that Benedict soundly rejects.

Here Benedict is in continuity with Paul VI’s recognition in his 1967 Populorum Progressio that generous gifts – offered in charity – are not sufficient to eliminate hunger or reduce poverty if not linked to the effort for “building a world where all people, no matter what their race, religion or nationality, can live fully human lives, freed from servitude imposed on them by others or by natural forces over which they have no sufficient control; a world where freedom is not an empty word …”

Second, Catholic social teaching is central to the message and mission of evangelisation. Benedict is very careful in distinguishing action in the political sphere as a “direct duty” of working for a just ordering of society – something proper to the laity – and the promotion of just structures through the “indirect duty” of rational argument and moral sensitisation – something proper to church leaders. The Church has the responsibility to promote rational argument (the Pope calls it the “purification of reason”) and moral sensitisation. Indeed, the Pope argues that without such reawakening of moral forces “just structures are neither established nor prove effective in the long run”. I believe Benedict is emphasising the power of effective use of Catholic social teaching, something we have seen clearly here in Zambia over the years since independence from Britain in 1964. Bishops’ pastoral letters, statements from justice and peace commissions, formation programmes for laity, Religious and clergy: all these efforts have brought the Church’s social teaching into the public sphere of politics and policy.

It is true that many politicians in Zambia (and certainly in other countries as well) assert that social teaching interventions in socio-economic, governance and justice issues are “political” and insist that Church leaders should be silent on such affairs and concentrate only on “spiritual” matters. Can these critics of Church activism find support from Benedict’s position? The answer is an emphatic no, in my opinion. For Benedict’s view is in continuity with the major emphasis of that great social teaching document from the 1971 Synod of Bishops, Justice in the World : “Action on behalf of justice and participation in the transformation of the world” is constitutive (that is, central, essential, necessary, indispensable) to the preaching of the Good News.

Third, solidarity is a basic mark of true charity and a key element in “the struggle for justice and love in the world of today”, as the encyclical puts it. Benedict introduces the notion of solidarity when he discusses the consequences of an increasing globalisation of communication (enabling us to know the needs of others around the world) and of the means of assistance (enabling us to respond to these needs). I would describe solidarity as the sense that moves us beyond the physical reality of economic interdependence to the ethical reality of human interconnectedness. It is a profoundly moral sense that teaches us that our well-being is dependent on the well-being of others and that no matter how materially prosperous some of us may feel, we are spiritually and morally poor when we live in a world of great disparity.

As popular as was this concept of solidarity with John Paul II, it was Paul VI who had earlier defined its message in Populorum Progressio : “There is no progress towards the complete development of women and men without the simultaneous development of all humanity in the spirit of solidarity.” I believe that Benedict speaks of this situation when he makes a very strong statement of what can or cannot constitute the Church as the normative community described in Acts 2: 44-45: “… within the community of believers there can never be room for a poverty that denies anyone what is needed for a dignified life.” That poverty, as noted above, cannot be dealt with by the gift of charity alone but requires also the consequence of charity, the promotion of a justice that changes the structures of society. In Zambia, our Church’s current calls for more integral development and for more accountable governance mean that charity moves into social activism.

These three key arguments, on activism, evangelisation and solidarity reveal a framework for my social activism and that of so many others in Zambia and around the world. I don’t believe I have distorted Benedict’s message to justify my activism. Indeed, I’ve been personally challenged to examine my activism in the light of his call for prayer, humility and hope as necessary elements in effective charitable activity.

I take consolation from the canonisation of a contemporary Jesuit saint just a few months before the new encyclical was released. Fr Alberto Hurtado, a social activist in Chile in the early twentieth century, is reported to have remarked once: “Marx said that religion was the opium of the people. But I also know that charity can be the opium of the rich.” Certainly a charity without justice, without commitment to structural change, can be such an opium. But I see in Deus Caritas Est a beautiful description of a charity that is not an opium. For Benedict’s invitation to charity is never far from the mandate for justice .

If a revised version of this important encyclical were one day to be released (though I don’t think encyclicals come out with revisions), I’d recommend that the precision of its powerful message would be greatly enhanced by a quotation from the 1971 Synod: “Christian love of neighbour and justice cannot be separated. For love implies an absolute demand for justice, namely a recognition of the dignity and rights of one’s neighbour. Justice attains its inner fullness only in love.” What could be clearer?

Here is exciting news reported by Paul Badde, Vatican correspondent for the German newspaper DIE WELT, longtime neighbor in Rome and friend of Joseph Ratzinger, in
www.kath.net/detail.php?id=12868 from Rome last night. In translation, I have indicated passages where I am not sure I understood the sense of the words correctly, and for which I hope our native German speakers can help out) -
---------------------------------------------------------------
For the first time a Pope will visit
the Pilgrim Church of the "Holy Face"
By Paul Badde

John Paul II repeatedly called for the “purification of memory” in the Catholic Church. Benedict XVI will be taking a spectacular new step in this direction in May when he visits the “Holy Face” of Manoppello, first disclosed to the world in September 2004 by Die Welt.

“Should we not see the true destiny of the world and call on God louder and more urgently to show us his face?” this Pope asked years ago when he was a cardinal. Recently he explained that Dante’s Divina Commedia had inspired him in his first encyclical (on love), in which, what in the end we meet in the innermost light of Paradise is not just a more blazing light but the tender face of a man: the face of Jesus Christ. That God has “a human face” is the all-moving high point of the “cosmic excursion.”

Dante’s poem from 1320, along with the Pope’s travel plans, remind us that the current “war of caricatures” is truly a caricature of earlier picture storms. The true conflict over the true picture of God has a history of insane frenzy behind it, in which thousands have been killed, though at the hand of Christians, not Muslims. Countless icons have been burned or chopped to pieces, and those who honored these icons banned, persecuted, and murdered.

In the year 730, Emperer Leon III, the Isaurian, wanted to destroy all the icons of the Byzantine kingdom in order “to purify” the Christian cult. After him, the same fever has infected Christianity every so often, accompanied by heated debates.

The central point made by stubborn defenders of sacred images has always been the same: Christians have an original image of God. In Jesus Christ God showed his face. Therefore Christians must illustrate Christ.

In the beginning of Christianity, therefore, was not something written but a picture. Until the Gospels were written, the early Church only had the Jewish Bible. But that did not make Christianity a religion by the book. For example, Ethiopian Christians up to the 9th century were able to grow and develop only using icons and oral narrations, totally without written materials.

The original experience of a God that showed himself to man was soon coupled to reports of a secret original picture that has been passed on in the innermost sanctums of Christianity from generation to generation.

Such a “picture of King Abgar” with “many creases”, from Edessa in north Anatolia (now Turkey), was first described in early Roman texts in the 6th century. Immured securely within a city gate, it reportedly had withstood several assaults. Later its presence was documented in Constantinople where it reportedly served as a model for the great Christ mosaic on the dome of St. Sophia.

Then in the 8th century, (references to) the picture dropped out of Byzantine texts altogether, at the same time as a similarly enigmatic portrait on a soft filmy cloth suddenly appeared in Rome, where soon it was called “Veronica’s sudarium" (Schweisstuch - literally, sweat-sheet). In the grottoes under St. Peter’s Basilica are five frescoes which show the “Ciborium” which Pope John VII ordered made for this “most holy sudarium.”

The pillared altar was the most important reliquary shrine of the old Basilica. In 1506 when the construction of the present Basilica started, Donato Bramante erected over the foundation stone a new treasure chamber for the crown relics. The first of the four towering columns on which the dome of St. Peter’s rests was built as a high-security repository for “Veronica’s veil,” which was reportedly placed in it in 1608 when the old shrine was torn down.

Then once again, later in the 17th century, the Ur-icon once again “disappeared” – although since then, once a year for a few seconds, a “Veronica relic”* is shown on the Loggia of this column. (As correspondent for Die Welt, having “seen” this relic on March 13, 2005, I am convinced that the naked eye cannot see anything on this “portrait.”)[Badde describes that experience in a story I translated and posted in the RFC forum last year.]

Has the Mother-Icon of Christ disappeared from this world? Perhaps not. In the meantime, a whole series of indicators have now shown overwhelmingly that the "Holy Face” of Manoppello which Pope Benedict will visit in May is identical to “Veronica’s sudarium” and to the even older Abgar picture. It has, all at once, the qualities of a photograph, a holograph, a painting, along with signs of puzzling impossibilities and imprecisions.

The material is finer than nylon. Above all, however, the Face of Christ does not resemble any known art work. The shadowing on the portrait is delicate, as only Leonardo could magically create with sfumatura.

In many ways the picture looks like a photograph, but the right pupil (of the eye) is slightly raised upward ["in der Iris ist die rechte Pupille leicht nach oben verschoben" - this is the phrase that I particularly cannot make sense of],
which is not possible in any photograph. Neither can it be a holograph, which it resembles when the veil is lit from behind. Four clear creases mark the piece of cloth, as though it had been for a long time folded (once lengthwise and then twice horizontally).

The colors shimmer, changing from umber, sienna, silver, slate, copper, bronze or gold, like butterfly wings [and I might add, exactly like Benedict's eyes!]; but under the microscope, no trace of color can be seen in the texture of the cloth, and if one holds it against the light, it appears transparent as clear glass and even the folds disappear! This last phenomenon can only be seen in so-called “mussel silk.” the most precious fabric in antiquity.

The difference from other "normal" fabrics however can be appreciated with the naked eye. On the upper part the portrait has no right and left corners where at some time, a patch of finest silk was placed. [Denn links und rechts oben fehlen dem Bild zwei Ecken, die irgendwann durch Flicken aus feinster Seide ersetzt wurden.] Against the light these patches look gray, while the veil is transparent as only mussel-silk can be.

In Manoppello the Portrait is highly venerated. Here they believe the legend that in 1506 an angel brought the portrait there. This legend was not questioned until a few years back when Sister Blandina Schloemer and Father Heinrich Pfeiffer, a German Trappist nun and a German Jesuit, began to investigate where “the angel” came from.

Certainly from Rome. But even the German Pope can have no answers for where it really came from before it survived the past few centuries in Italy. Here he will confront the question for the first time, kneeling before the icon.

The face has a peculiar mirror effect {Spiegelwirkung] It seems far and near at the same time. It most resembles the man who was wrapped in the Shroud of Turin. It is as majestic and puzzling as the Shroud – that other fabric, though far far coarser than Veronica’s Veil, which has been described since earliest times as “not made by human hands.”

But no two fabrics could be less like each other than these two: one is linen, the other mussel-silk – each of completely different density, thickness, structure and weave. Each one “twists” differently.

Imprecision and highly problematic measurableness are almost "woven" into both materials. Thus. the congruence between the two images found on such completely different fabrics is even more stunning.

The Holy Face of Manoppello

Both fabrics show an identical face, both are original images, but are completely different otherwise. All others are copies. However, if there is any other fabric in the world that can lay claim to be the “second shroud”, then it is this one which the 265th successor to Peter will be coming to kneel before.

John the Evangelist wrote that Peter was the first to see “the linen bindings and sudorium” in the empty grave (after the Resurrection). Right after him, John had gone in, “saw and believed.” What did he see that made him believe immediately? And what will Benedict XVI see this time?

He knows that in the 6th century, Byzantine army generals carroed a secret portrait of Christ as victory flags in their wars and massacres against the Persians, just as the Israelites carried the Ark of the Covenant in their battles against the Philistines. The Ark of the Covenant itself – Israel’s most holy relic containing the Commandments from Sinai - has been lost and found again in adventurous manner until it finally disappeared. Will the reappearance of God’s Face inspire the Pope as a rediscovery of the Ark? [Muss das Wiederauftauchen des Göttlichen Gesichts den Papst da nicht noch mehr beflügeln als eine letzte Wiederentdeckung der Bundeslade?]

Christianity today cannot and should not fight any more wars, whether against the Persians or th[e Philistines. But on the day he was elected, Benedict XVI did take on tremendous challenges in which Christianity can well use its ancient battle flag: the divine measure of man, whom Dante glimpsed in the light of love, Him who “moves the sun and stars.
---------------------------------------------------------------

Paul Badde has written a book about the Manoppello icon. More information about it can be found on the quadrilingual website www.voltosanto.it/
I have also posted a brief backgrounder from the site in ODDS AND ENDS.

P.S. The Vatican possesses the so-called "Mandylion of Edessa" which for centuries was believed to be "Veronica's veil" but it now appears that the relic in Manoppello may be the authentic relic.

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 18/02/2006 17.12]

ANOTHER DISSIDENT THEOLOGIAN WARMS A BIT TO THE POPE

Saturday, February 18, 2006

Pope’s report ‘pleasant surprise’

Rev. Curran discusses dispute with Vatican at Holy Cross

By Kathleen A. Shaw TELEGRAM & GAZETTE STAFF

WORCESTER— The Rev. Charles Curran, a Catholic priest who was told by Pope Benedict XVI, while he was still Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, that he could not teach theology in a Catholic institution, told a gathering at the College of the Holy Cross Thursday that he is “pleasantly surprised” by the content and tone of the recent encyclical by the pope.

The pope’s first encyclical, called Deus Caritas Est (God is Love), was recently published and is available on the Vatican Web site. An encyclical is a writing from the pope to members of the church on a topic of concern.

Cardinal Ratzinger, before he was elevated to the papacy and took the name Benedict XVI, headed the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith when the writings of Rev. Curran, who was teaching moral theology at Catholic University of America, came to his attention.

Rev. Curran, who remains a priest in good standing with the Rochester, N.Y., diocese and teaches at Southern Methodist University in Texas, told a standing-room-only audience at Holy Cross that he first knew he had problems when Cardinal Ratzinger was quoted in an Italian publication as saying “ethics” was the concern of the church in North America.

Rev. Curran takes a more progressive view of sexual ethics than either the late John Paul II or Benedict XVI. He was among theologians who, in 1968, wrote a response to Pope Paul VI’s encyclical, Humanae Vitae, which said using artificial birth control methods was not moral. He was fired from his position at Catholic University in 1986 after Cardinal Ratzinger said he could not teach theology in a Catholic institution.

The priest said he got to know quite a bit about the new pope during the 10 years his writings were being studied by Cardinal Ratzinger and his congregation. The cardinal drew his theology from St. Augustine, an early Christian thinker, while Rev. Curran said he tends to be more in line with the thinking of St. Thomas Aquinas, a major theologian of the Middle Ages. Augustinians take the view that it is “us against the world,” while followers of Aquinas, often called Thomists, see the goodness of the world and of creation.

Rev. Curran said Benedict shows none of the “us against the world” philosophy in his new encyclical.

In assessing the 26-year papacy of John Paul II, Rev. Curran said the pope did many good things. One of his best achievements was standing up for the world’s poor, he said. Rev. Curran said the pope never stopped talking about how the wealthier nations had to help those in Third World countries.

Noteworthy in the 2006 Annuario Pontificio, the official annual directory of Catholic prelates,
released yesterday, is the fact that the title "Patriarch of the Occident" no longer appears
among the formal titles of the Pope.

Benedict XVI is described in the directory as -
Bishop of Rome
Vicar of Jesus Christ
Successor of the Prince of Apostles
Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church
Primate of Italy
Metropolitan Archbishop of the Province of Rome
Sovereign of Vatican City
Servant of the Servants of God

This is followed by data on Joseph Ratzinger's ecclesiastical biography up to his election as Pope.

The title "Patriarch of the Occident" has been abolished, it seems, because it appeared
to discriminate in favor of only the Western Church, but the Pope is head of the
Universal Church,but better still, in the spirit of ecumenism, to avoid any contraposition
with the Patriarchs of the Eastern Churches.

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 19/02/2006 17.16]

FROM A MORMON NEWSPAPER, PRAISE FOR PAPA

Benedict's encyclical offers hope for world

By Jerry Johnston
Deseret Morning News

Popes don't deliver general conference talks. They write "encyclical letters" — epistles to the Catholic faithful. Their writing is even divided into verses.

And last Christmas, Pope Benedict XVI sent out a Christmas newsletter to his family of 1 billion members. In the letter, which ran to 24 pages, the news — in the tradition of Christmas letters — was all good. The news was "God is love."

I read it the other evening. The message teaches much about love but much more about the man, Benedict XVI.

Back when the pope was still Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, he had the reputation of a "doctrinal drill sergeant." He was a papal guard dog. "God's Rottweiler," they called him. But this encyclical displays another side. Beneath the firm, outer shell, the pope has a soft soul.

And I think there's a lesson there. Often we see someone who is rigid about rules and behavior and figure they must be brittle all the way through. But that's not always the case. Usually, I think, that firm crust on the outside simply shields the vulnerable bread within. At least such seems to be the case with Pope Benedict XVI. His encyclical seems to have something positive for everybody — Mennonites, Muslims, Methodists and Mormons. Here are a few kernels of wheat that I gleaned from him:


"We contribute to a better world only by personally doing good now, with full commitment, wherever we have the opportunity . . . A Christian knows when it is time to speak of God and when it is better to say nothing and let love alone speak.

Faith, hope and charity go together. Hope is practiced through the virtue of patience, which continues to do good, even in the face of apparent failure . . . Faith tells us that God has given us his son for our sakes . . . Love is the light — and, in the end, the only light — that can always illuminate a world grown dim and give us the courage to keep living and working.

It is time to reaffirm the importance of prayer in the face of activism and the growing secularism of many Christians engaged in charitable work. Clearly, the Christian who prays does not claim to be able to change God's plans or correct what He has foreseen. Rather, he seeks an encounter with the Father of Jesus Christ, asking God to be present with the consolation of the Spirit.

When people claim to build a case against God in defence of man, on whom can they depend when human activity proves powerless?

Mary's greatness consists in the fact that she wants to magnify God, not herself. She is lowly . . . she places herself completely at the disposal of God's initiatives."


Needless to say, there's more. The rest of the encyclical can be found on the Vatican Web site: www.vatican.va. Click on "God Is love" (Deus Caritas Est). Still, the above quotes do give a feeling for what Benedict XVI is about. In a world of woe, he's determined to offer hope. Life beats us all up. At times, even religious leaders have to scold. But for me, nothing is more motivating than someone preaching optimism with firm conviction. I know what needs to be done. I just need someone to help me find the courage to do it.

Pope Benedict XVI, I think, is one of those people.

[Modificato da benefan 19/02/2006 18.33]

AND SO, IT'S OFFICIAL....
Here is how the Pope announced it at the end of the General Audience today,
Feast of Peter's Chair. In translation from the Italian-
----------------------------------------------------------------


The Feast of the Chair of Peter is a day particularly appropriate to announce that a Consistory will take place on March 24 at which I will name the new members of the College of Cardinals. This announcement is attached to this feast day because the Cardinals have the task of supporting and helping the Successor of Peter in the fulfillment of the apostolic office which has been entrusted to him in the service of the Church.

It is not by chance that in ancient ecclesiastic documents, Popes have described the College of Cardinals as pars corpori nostri (cfr F.C. Wernz, Ius Decretalium, II, n. 459). The cardinals, indeed, constitute for the Pope a kind of Senate, whose services he avails of in the discharge of the tasks connected to his ministry as "perpetual and visible principle and basis of the unity of the faith and of communion" (cfr Lumen gentium, 18).

With the creation of the new cardinals, I mean to complete the number of 120 member electors of the College of Cardinals fixed by Pope Paul VI of venerated memory (cfr AAS 65, 1973, p. 163).
Here are the names of the new CArdinals:

1. Mons. WILLIAM JOSEPH LEVADA, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

2. Mons. FRANC RODÉ, C.M., Prefect of the Congregation for the Institutes of Consecrated Life and the Society of Apostolic Life;

3. Mons. AGOSTINO VALLINI, Prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signature;

4. Mons. JORGE LIBERATO UROSA SAVINO, Archbishop of Caracas;

5. Mons. GAUDENCIO B. ROSALES, Archbishop of Manila;

6. Mons. JEAN-PIERRE RICARD, Archbishop of Bordeaux;

7. Mons. ANTONIO CAÑIZARES LLOVERA, Archbishop of Toledo;

8. Mons. NICOLAS CHEONG-JIN-SUK, Archbishop of Seoul;

9. Mons. SEAN PATRICK O'MALLEY, O.F.M. Cap., Archbishop of Boston;

10. Mons. STANISLAW DZIWISZ, Archbishop of Cracow;

11. Mons. CARLO CAFFARRA, Archbishop of Bologna;

12. Mons. JOSEPH ZEN ZE-KIUN, S.D.B., Archbishop of Hong Kong.

I have also decided to elevate to the honor of cardinal 3 ecclesiastics older than 80 in consideration of the services they have rendered to the Church with exemplary loyalty and admirable dedication.They are:

1. Mons. ANDREA CORDERO LANZA DI MONTEZEMOLO, Archpriest of the Basilica of St. Paul outside-the-walls;

2. Mons. PETER POREKU DERY, Archbishop emeritus of Tamale (Ghana);

3. P. ALBERT VANHOYE, S.J., who was the Rector of the Pontifical Biblical Isntitute and Secretary of the Pontifical Biblical Commission.

The new cardinals reflect the universality of the Church. They come from various parts of the world and inhabit diverse mansions in the service of the people of God. I invite you all to raise to God a special prayer for that the Lord may grant the, the necessary graces to carry out their mission with generosity.

As I said at the start, the Consistory will take place on March 24 and the follwing day, March 25, Feast of the Annunciation, I will have the joy of presiding at a solemn Concelbration of the mass with the new cardinals. For this occasion I am invite all ingthe members of the College of Cardinals, with whom I plan to have a reunion of reflection and prayer on March 23.
----------------------------------------------------------------

There were practically no surprises. The names had been mentioned in speculative articles preceding the announcemment. One notable absence, Andre Vingt-Trois, archbishop of Paris.
(Could it be because the Pope could not name 2 French bishops in a short list of 13? He did name two Americans, but Mons. Levada was named by virtue of the position he occupies, not because of geographical considerations). On the other hand, there are three Oriental names - the Archbishop of Seoul was not on most speculative lists, but he joins the Archbishops of Manila and Hongkong. A Papal nod to Asia. Africa is represented in the over-80 group.

P.S. The list does include a new cardinal from Latin America. Thanks to Benefan, for correcting my mistake. Also, two Curial heads are among the other notable non-nominees - German Archbishop Paul Cordes of Cor Unum and Polish Archbishop Stanislaw Rylko of the Congregation for the Laity. Very curious to see what the Vatiscanistas will speculate about this!

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 22/02/2006 17.00]

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 23/02/2006 5.22]

Teresa, there was one from Latin America, the cardinal from Caracas, Venezuela.

OOPS! MY MISTAKE!!! - SORRY...

Thank you Teresa for the total translation. I know little Italian, but I had an idea of what he was saying...

[Modificato da loriRMFC 23/02/2006 3.26]

From Catholic World News

Pope, cardinals to confer before March 24 ceremony

Vatican, Feb. 23 (CWNews.com) - Pope Benedict XVI has called all the members of the College of Cardinals to Rome for a meeting on the day before the March consistory at which he will elevate new members.

When he announced the March 24 consistory, at his regular weekly public audience on February 22, the Holy Father mentioned that he would convene the cardinals for a day of "reflection and prayer" on the preceding day. The Pope's call for that meeting followed shortly after a February 13 session with the leaders of the Roman Curia.

During a private meeting with the world's cardinals, the Pope can seek opinions on particular proposals, and ask for open discussion of pastoral issues, using the prelates as a sounding board for his ideas. At the meeting on March 23, Pope Benedict might, for instance, call for reaction to his plans for a reorganization of the Roman Curia, or for some new pastoral initiative.

The Vatican does not release public information about the Pope's meetings with his advisers. However, news leaks from the February 13 meeting indicated that the main topic was the effort to achieve a reconciliation with traditionalists of the Society of St. Pius X. Reliable sources in the Vatican said that the discussion was to be resumed at a second meeting late in March-- perhaps just before the arrival of the world's cardinals. So a plan for reconciliation could be on the agenda when the Pope convenes the cardinals on March 23.

Sandro Magister is back in Italy from his lecture tour in the United States and today in
www.chiesa.espressonline.it/dettaglio.jsp?id=46201&eng=y
published his reaction to the new cardinals named by the Pope as well as his assessment of Benedict's first 10 months in the Papacy, delivered as a lecture in Washington, D.C. on 2/13/2006.
----------------------------------------------------------------

What Does the Pope-Theologian Teach?
First of All, the Truth
The first ten months of Benedict XVI, a “doctor of the Church.”
The naming of new cardinals. The inefficiency of the curia.
Large crowds and audiences, but few collaborators.
by Sandro Magister


Stefano Spaziani's B/W portraits are perfet to illustrate Magister's word picture of Benedict as "doctor of the Church."


ROMA, February 23, 2006 – On the day of the feast of the Chair of Saint Peter, at the end of his weekly audience with the pilgrims, Benedict XVI announced that next March 24 he will create 15 new cardinals.

With this reduced number of appointments, pope Joseph Ratzinger intentionally remained below the maximum threshold of 120 cardinal electors as established by the rules.

John Paul II, on the other hand, habitually exceeded this limit, nominating a significant number of extra cardinals each time.
....

Three of the new cardinals belong to religious orders: O’Malley is a Capuchin Franciscan, Zen is a Salesian, and Vanhoye is a Jesuit.

Many of those predicted to be made cardinals were passed by.

In all of Latin America, the only new red hat will go to a cardinal of Venezuela, a country where the Church is being sorely tested by the authoritarian government of Hugo Chávez.

In Asia, it is another bishop on the front lines who will be made a cardinal, the very energetic bishop of Hong Kong, who is most definitely feared by the Chinese authorities.

Only four have been selected within the Roman curia, and one of them is over 80 years old. So those remaining without the purple are Stanislaw Rylko of Poland, president of the Pontifical Council for the Laity; Paul Josef Cordes of Germany, president of “Cor Unum”; and Angelo Comastri of Italy, archpriest of the basilica of Saint Peter and vicar general of Vatican City.

It can be gathered from this that being the head of a Vatican office does not automatically clear the way to becoming a cardinal. It seems likely that with Benedict XVI, the purple will be associated, in the curia, with a few important dicasteries. And that some offices will be scaled down, or even suppressed.

Another of the candidates for the purple predicted by the media, Michael Fitzgerald, president of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, not only was not designated a cardinal, but was removed from his office and sent to Egypt as a nuncio.

The decision was made public on February 15, and came as a surprise even to Fitzgerald himself. In reality, Fitzgerald’s promotion as a cardinal was entirely unlikely, given the strong disagreement between him and Benedict XVI on crucial topics in the dialogue among religions, and in particular between Christianity and Islam. Fitzegerald is a convinced representative of the “spirit of Assisi” of which Ratzinger has always been critical.

Furthermore, the list of the new cardinals does not permit any speculation on who might take Angelo Sodano’s place as the new secretary of state, nor whether this substitution will happen soon or not.

One of the possible successors, Giovanni Lajolo, the current foreign minister for the Holy See, remains at his post without having received the purple.

Another person who was often conjectured for the job, cardinal Attilio Nicora, president of the administration of the patrimony of the apostolic see, was given another responsibility on February 21: he was made the papal legate for the basilicas of Saint Francis and Saint Mary of the Angels in Assisi. With this, he was taken off the roster of the candidates for secretary of state.

In short, not even the announcement of the consistory of March 23-25 – which will include “a meeting of reflection and prayer” of the entire college of cardinals with the pope – has satisfied the hopes that Benedict XVI would generate a “tsunami” of changes within the central government of the Church.

But this does not mean that, in this first phase of his pontificate, Benedict XVI has not left a strong impression of his own.

What follows here is an analysis of the first ten months of pope Ratzinger, delivered and discussed at the Cosmos Club of Washington on February 13, at the invitation of the Athanasius Society and Catholic News Agency.

Among those present for the discussion were Jim Nicholson, minister of Veteran’s Affairs in the Bush administration and the former U.S. ambassador to the Holy See; Deal Hudson, professor of philosophy at Fordham University and director of the Morley Institute for Church and Culture; Brian Saint-Paul, director of the monthly Catholic magazine on politics and culture “Crisis”; Fr. Rodger Hunter-Hall, professor at Christendom College in Alexandria; Pat Cipollone, Eugene Zurlo, Russel Shaw, and Robert Novak.

Program: Restore to the Truth Its Splendor
by Sandro Magister


Ten months have passed since the election of Joseph Ratzinger. Is it possible to identify a clear and coherent direction here? My answer is, yes.

Look at the first great public act of Benedict XVI. It was his first Mass in Saint Peter’s Square, on Sunday, April 24.

At the Gospel reading, these words of Jesus resounded: "I am the way, the truth, and the life, No one comes to the Father but by me."

They are the words that Christian art has almost always placed at the center of its depictions of Christ, the Risen Christ, the "Pantokrator" who rules the universe: the Gospel book he holds is opened on these words, so that all of us may read them.

"Dominus Jesus" – the controversial declaration of August 6, 2000, "on the unicity and salvific universality of Jesus Christ and of the Church" – was not therefore an invention of Ratzinger the theologian. It simply sets forth the essence of the Revelation of the New and Eternal Testament.

Look now at the second great public act of the pontificate of Benedict XVI. It was his first Mass at Saint John Lateran, the cathedral of the bishop of Rome, on Saturday, May 7.

In it, Benedict XVI asserted that the pope "must not proclaim his own ideas, but rather constantly bind himself and the Church to obedience to God's Word, in the face of every attempt to adapt it or water it down, and every form of opportunism."

So this is the program Pope Benedict has enunciated since the beginning: that of restoring to the truth – which is Christ in the definitive – its primacy and splendor.

In ten months, he has shown his intention to carry this out in all areas: in his first encyclical, in the liturgy, in catechesis, in law, in pastoral practice, in the magisterium of the bishops, in the application of Vatican Council II, in working for peace…

IN THE ENCYCLICAL

The first encyclical of Benedict XVI, published last January 25, is completely consistent with his program: to speak the truth about love, a word today "so tarnished, so spoiled and so abused." To demonstrate that "Deus est caritas."

The encyclical is a letter to the Christian people, but is also addressed to those far from the faith, to the "secularists," to those without faith. To all of these, Benedict XVI says: This is the true heart of the Christian faith. Understand this. With a God such as this, you may have the strength to live "as if God exists," even if you do not have the strength to believe.

Live as if within creation, and in the "quiet but clear voice" of every person’s conscience, there is his imprint: a "natural" law that defends the life of every human being "from conception to natural death."

The pope has asked for unity of action on the observance of this common law from non-Catholics – the Jews, the Muslims, the non-religious.

IN THE LITURGY

Benedict XVI has wished to restore to the celebration of the Mass the truth expressed by the great liturgical tradition.

The pope has said in many ways that the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist is real, supremely real, not symbolic. He said it by adoring the consecrated host silently on his knees, with a million young people in Cologne – in Protestant country! – and with the one hundred thousand children who received first communion in Saint Peter’s Square in Rome.

In particular, the pope called back to faithful observance of the true liturgical tradition the Neocatechumenal Way: one of the most vibrant Catholic movements of the past half century, but which often modifies the Mass and uses it as an "instrument" for missionary expansion, instead of accepting and celebrating it as the work of God, the "source and summit" of Christian life.

IN CATECHESIS

In publishing the question-and-answer compendium of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Benedict XVI wanted to offer to the "simple" – more so than to the learned – a guide to the truths of the faith.

The pope personally attended to the production and release of this compendium. He also wanted to add to it – not as an accompaniment, but as an integral part – fourteen images of sacred art which he selected personally. And to the first of these images, an icon of Christ preserved at Mount Athos, he dedicated a part of his homily on June 29, the feast of Saints Peter and Paul.

The pope has made a committment to restore the truth of Christian art, just as he has in the case of the great tradition of liturgical music.

IN THE MAGISTERIUM OF THE BISHOPS

Benedict XVI has addressed severe reminders to bishops he believes to be timid, doubtful, reticent in teaching true doctrine.

For example, he said to the Austrian bishops: "There are some topics relating to the truth of the faith, and above all to moral doctrine, which are not present in the catechesis and preaching of your dioceses to a sufficient extent, and which sometimes are either not confronted at all or are not addressed in the clear sense understood by the Church. Perhaps those who are responsible for the proclamation [of the truth] are afraid that people may draw back if they speak too clearly. However, experience in general demonstrates that it is precisely the opposite that happens. Don’t deceive yourselves! Catholic teaching offered in an incomplete manner is a contradiction of itself and cannot be fruitful in the long term".

IN LAW AND IN PASTORAL PRACTICE

Inaugurating the judicial year in the Vatican, last January 28, Benedict XVI warned against reducing "pastoral charity" to "complacent attitudes" that are contrary to the truth of things.

He restated that "the fundamental point of encounter between law and pastoral practice is love for the truth."

And he cautioned not to "obscure" the truth that is "the indissolubility of matrimony" in that this "belongs to the Christian mystery in its totality." Because every time one makes spouses who are in difficulty forget the indissolubility of their union, one does not help them, but rather "one deceives them."

IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COUNCIL

The pope also wanted to restore its proper truth to Vatican Council II, forty years after its conclusion. He has criticized the false interpretation of the Council as "discontinuity and rupture," as "the spirit" contrasted with "the letter." And he explained, instead, its "proper hermeneutic," its "rightful key of interpretation and application": that is, the Council as "reform," as "renewal in the continuity of the one subject-Church which the Lord has given to us."

IN WORKING FOR PEACE

Significantly, Benedict XVI entitled his first message for the World Day for Peace "In truth, peace." The pope wanted to express, right from the title, "the conviction that wherever and whenever men and women are enlightened by the splendor of truth, they naturally set out on the path of peace."

In this message, and then in his speech to the diplomatic corps, he brought all of international politics beneath the scrutiny of the truth:

"Those who are committed to truth cannot fail to reject the law of might, which is based on a lie and has so frequently marked human history, nationally and internationally, with tragedy. The lie often parades itself as truth, but in reality it is always selective and tendentious, selfishly designed to manipulate people, and finally subject them. Political systems of the past, but not only the past, offer a bitter illustration of this. Set against this, there is truth and truthfulness, which lead to encounter with the other, to recognition and understanding."

Terrorism was also placed beneath the same scrutiny:

"Nihilism and the fundamentalism of which we are speaking share an erroneous relationship to truth: the nihilist denies the very existence of truth, while the fundamentalist claims to be able to impose it by force."

In short, the primacy of the truth appears to be truly the common thread since the beginning of this pontificate. Benedict XVI, the first pope-theologian, really is showing himself as a "doctor of the Church."

But the implementation of his program has also faced limitations from the very start.

It is true: Benedict XVI enjoys the trust and attention of great crowds of the faithful. The number of those who attend his liturgies and preaching is more than double than in the case of John Paul II, and participants listen to him with great attentiveness.

But within the Vatican curia, he is very isolated.

The system of communication around the pope is inefficient and confused. His texts are issued listlessly, translated late and poorly into the various languages. For example, his speech to the Roman curia on December was obscured through blatant disregard: and this was a discourse of capital importance, dedicated in great part to the interpretations of Vatican Council II.

The delay in the publication of the encyclical "Deus Caritas Est" is emblematic of this general dysfunction. And Benedict XVI is aware of this. The proof is that it is he himself who announces and explains his major texts, doing himself what his co-workers do not do. The official presentation of the encyclical, made at the Holy See press office by three curia high directors – cardinal Martino and archbishops Levada and Cordes – was astounding for its banality.

It is known that there are those who actively oppose this pope, both within and outside of the Vatican. One indication of this opposition comes from the rumors that have been spread about the unfolding of the conclave. These rumors are intended to show that the election of Ratzinger was not at all equitable, that it was in doubt until the very end, that it was unduly favored by the fact that he was the dean of the college of cardinals, that he is in the pocket of Opus Dei, that the time is ripe for a new pope, preferably a Latin American, and that, in short, Benedict XVI should submit himself to these inherent limitations.

But there is another reason for pope Benedict’s solitude. It is the slight stature of many of the Church’s leaders, inside the curia and outside of it: this is a group which, because of its intrinsic limitations, is incapable of being equal to this pope’s demanding program and his great vision.

And, finally, there are limits – perhaps – connected to the person of pope Ratzinger himself. There seems to be a gap between his vision and the few practical decisions he has executed so far.

But these decisions will come. After all, only ten months has passed since the white smoke of April 19.

Washington, February 13, 2006

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 24/02/2006 7.44]

ON BENEDICT'S ELECTION


FROM AN INTERVIEW WITH RETIRED CARDINAL WILLIAMS OF NEW ZEALAND
By John Allen in this week's National Catholic Reporter


NCR: Let's talk about the conclave that elected Benedict XVI. You've said there was no lobbying among the cardinals?

Cardinal Thomas Williams: There were no blocks or lobbying, and no tone of 'don't vote for x.' Coming in, I didn't know what to expect. I suppose I thought that my vote is as good as anyone else's, even if I am a country yokel, so if there is a question of garnering votes, I thought, well, mine is as valuable as anyone else's. I would drive a hard bargain. Yet I would say that the ethos against lobbying really was observed.

How did the politics unfold, in your experience?

We were encouraged to discuss things with one another outside the General Congregation meetings, over meals, coffee, and gatherings of small groups. I was only present at one such meeting, which included 16 [English-speaking] cardinals. There was no discussion of the merits and demerits of a given candidate, but it was in the spirit of 'You know so-and-so, what can you tell me?' It was held at the Irish College, and there was a great spirit of fraternity. It began with a very good meal, which was formally hosted by Cardinal Desmond Connell of Dublin, though the meal was actually prepared by the staff at the Irish College.

How could the process be improved?

We [cardinals] need to find ways to get to know each other better. For example, I was staying with the Marists in Rome and saw an insert in La Croix that had pictures of all the cardinals, with their ages and nationalities. I took it with me to the General Congregation meetings, and whenever somebody would speak, I'd pull out the sheet and identify them. Before long, a number of other cardinals would come over to ask, 'Who's that speaking?'

Why do you think Ratzinger won?

He was the best known member of the College of Cardinals, and it was clear that those who knew him best respected and admired him most. His writings were well-disseminated. … Then there was his leadership in the General Congregation meetings. He was patient, yet quite decisive. … His homilies were also admirable. Finally, I think he represented what I called the need for a "bilingual pope." By that I meant someone who could speak the language of the faithful, the language of Scripture, tradition, the Fathers, and so on, but who could also speak the language of the modern Barbarians. I felt Ratzinger had this ability. He could engage the secular world on its own terms. He would be not just a religious leader, but a world leader.

And thank you, Benefan! How refreshing to hear an English speaking prelate speak the way Cardinal Williams does! And I love his insight about the need for a "bilingual" Pope. I hope, as the first anniversary of Benedict's election nears, that more cardinals will come out with similar 'apercus" into the Conclave and the choice it made.

Here is one of several articles in the past week that I was unable to translate right away. It was written on 2/22/06 by Aldo Maria Valli, Vatican correspondent for TG-3, on Italian state television, and it is striking for how it anticipates what Sandro Magister would publish a day later
(see Magister article above). It is a short but very powerful summary of Benedict's first 10 months as Pope.
--------------------------------------------------------------

The simplicity of a sculptor
who brings the essential to light
By Aldo Maria Valli

It is May 7, 2005. Benedict XVI is taking possession of the Basilica of St. John in Lateran and says: “The Pope should not proclaim his own ideas, but rather commit himself and the Church constantly to obey the word of God.” That is his program, which he has followed since.

His style cannot be simpler or more sober. Most attentive in matters of liturgy, he never yields to the temptation of playing the lead before crowds. But the crowds are flocking to him. Maybe precisely because of this.

Let’s take his homilies. Never once a word used randomly, never a concept taken for granted. Even on less solemn occasions, it is always the theologian and the pastor who speaks from the chair.

On December 22, at the Sala Clementina of the Apostolic Palace, before the Roman Curia assembled for the traditional Christmas wellwishing, he started his discourse with the words of his beloved Augustine: “Wake up, man, because for you God became man.” Cardinals and bishops alike understood right away that the words were addressed to each of them.

On Benedict's lips, words are never banal. You may agree with them or not, but surely, his words will not leave you indifferent.

It is striking how much attention he gives to the idea of truth. The message for the World Day of Peace, January 1 2006, was entitled “In truth, peace,” and the New Year’s message he addressed to the ambassadors accredited to the Holy See opened with a peremptory statement: "The commitment to truth is the soul of justice.”

Truth is a word that is highly problematic in modern culture, but the Pope has almost made it his manifesto. The temptation to an easy consensus cannot be farther from this teutonic Pope who, as bishop, chose the motto “Cooperatores veritatis” (Co-workers for the truth), and a year ago exclaimed: “How much filth there is in the Church!” in his meditations on the Stations of the Cross.

The eyes of the world were focused at the time on the aged, fragile Polish Pope. It would have been easy for Cardinal Ratzinger to yield to sentimentalism. But he chose a different road. But again it is striking how he succeeds in catching attention by then making the issue positive.

Two examples will make it clear. In the now-famous motu proprio that he sent to the Franciscans of Assisi revoking the autonomy granted to them by Paul VI, this is how he addressed the friars: “Dear sons of St. Francis, I call on you to submit yourselves, in the spirit of sincere communion, to the Bishop of Assisi, to the regional bishops conference and to the national bishops conference.”

The same way that on January 12, 2006, speaking at the Vatican to families of the Neocatechumenal movement, after expressing his appreciation for their work of evangelization, he asked them to observe closely whatever is prescribed in the approved liturgical manuals of the Church. It was to tell them that in litrugical celebrations, no movement can go its own way.

Essence, simplicity, truth. The first stage of Benedict’s pontificate may be described in those words. More than 10 years ago, he wrote that the reform of the Church should consist of ablation, or better still, of a pruning back, eliminating the superfluous, as the sculptor does with stone, in order to bring to light that which truly counts: the face of Jesus. We can very well say that the sculptor Benedict is now at work.

John Allen makes the following observations in his 2/24/06 "Word from Rome" -


Given the small number of new cardinals, and the fact that most of them were named to cardinal-track positions by John Paul II, the nominations don't reveal a great deal about the course Benedict intends to chart.

That said, there are three observations to be made.

First, the appointments are another signal that Benedict intends to "color within the lines" more than John Paul II. Instead of dispensing from the ceiling of 120 voting age cardinals, Benedict carefully limited himself to 12 selections, the exact number it will require on March 25 to return to 120. It's another small sign of how conscious he is of himself as the bearer of a tradition, rather than a charismatic leader blazing new trails.

Second, the choice of Bishop Joseph Zen of Hong Kong is confirmation that in making his personnel moves, Benedict will not be swayed by external political considerations. When he had to name his own successor at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, conventional wisdom said that it would be impolitic to name an American. Benedict wanted William Levada, and tapped him anyway. In the case of Zen, conventional diplomatic wisdom said that the Vatican's strong desire for improved relations with Beijing made his elevation impossible, since the mainland Chinese authorities have been irked by Zen's strong comments on religious freedom and democracy. Once again, Benedict did it anyway.

Finally, one striking thing about Wednesday's nominations is that geographical inequities in the distribution of cardinals were not addressed. Prior to Benedict's picks, for example, the Americans had more cardinals of voting age than Brazil, Mexico and the Philippines combined, the three largest Catholic countries on earth, representing a block of more than 300 million Catholics. On Wednesday, the Americans got two new cardinals, while the Philippines got one, Brazil and Mexico none. Similarly, in the April conclave, American cardinals cast more votes than all of Africa, and yet the only African picked this time is already beyond voting age. The fact that Benedict didn't balance the scales more is perhaps another indication that his focus is largely on the man, not political considerations. [My comment: To which we can only say, Bravo, Benedict! That's the way it should be. One becomes a cardinal because he is worthy of the honor, not because he "represents" a sizeable population!]

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 25/02/2006 9.08]

There won't be a general audience on March 8, because that falls right in the middle
of the annual spiritual exercises for the Pope and the Roman Curia this year.
More details, in this story from Apcom, translated herewith-
----------------------------------------------------------------

The first spiritual retreat for Joseph Ratzinger as Pope will take place at the Vatican
from March 5-11. Cardinal Marco Ce, Patriarch emeritus of Venice, will guide the
meditations for the Pope and members of the Roman Curia on the theme “Walking with Jesus
towards Easter, under the guidance of Mark the Evangelist”.

During the week of the retreat, the audiences and regular activities of the Pope and
the Roman Curia will be suspended.

The retreat starts Sunday, March 5, at 6 p.m. in the Redemptoris Mater chapel
of the Apostolic Palace.

“The path of humanity, in the nights of history, seeks the light, seeks Paradise,
seeks true life, reconciliation among all men, between heaven and earth, and universal peace.”
These words – written by then Cardinal Ratzinger for the Easter Vigil of 2005 – open the Pope’s
invitation to all participants in the weeklong spiritual exercises.

Apcom has learned that the week of prayer will open with a Eucharistic exposition,
celebration of Vespers, an introductory meditaiton and the Adoration. Except for the
opening and concluding days, each day will consist of three sessions, each with a
specific meditation theme, all taken from the Gospel of St. Mark
Sunday, March 5:
“Sit pax intranti, exeunti gratia Sancti”
Monday, March 6:
Walking towards Easter
Prepare the way for the Lord
Jesus, one with sinners, is tempted
Tuesday, March 7:
“Be converted and follow me”
“Arise and walk”
“He who wanted to, called out”
Wednesday, March 8:
“The sower plants the Word”
“Why are you so fearful?”
From Phillip’s Caesaria to Jerusalem
Thursday, March 9:
“This is my Beloved Son – listen to him”
“Rabbi, that I may get back my sight”
“Take this, for this is my Body”
Friday, March 10:
“Not what I want, but what you will”
“The Crucified One has risen”
“Go forth and preach”
Saturday, March 11:
“Resurrexi et adhuc tecum sum”

Recent masters of the annual spiritual exercises have been Mons. Angelo Comastri,
then Archbishop of Loreto, in 2003; Mons. Bruno Forte, 2004; and Mons. Renato Corti,
Bishop of Novara, in 2005, the last retreat for Pope John Paul II.

In 1976, Cardinal Karol Wojtyla was asked by Pope Paul VI to conduct the exercises.
The 22 meditations he prepared for that retreat were published as a boook called
“Sign of Contradiction.”

----------------------------------------------------------------
P.S. Does anyone know offhand what year Cardinal Ratzinger directed the retreat? ?

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 25/02/2006 19.58]

I apologize - I posted something here where it does not belong. I have moved it to NEWS ABOUT THE CHURCH.

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 25/02/2006 20.32]

I should have posted this here this moning at the time I posted my translation of the Angelus discourse in the AUDIENCE AND ANGELUS thread.
----------------------------------------------------------------
After the Angelus prayer today, the Holy Father added these words in Italian to comment on recent developments in the world:

"These days have been filled with news of the tragic violence in Iraq in which killings have taken place even in the mosques. These are actions which sow mourning, feed hate, and seriously impede the already difficult task of reconstructing that nation.

"In Nigeria, encounters between Christiams and Muslims have been going on for days, with many victims and the destruction of churches and mosques.

"While I firmly condemn the violation of places of worship, I entrust to the Lord all the dead and those who mourn them. I invite everyone to intense prayer and penitence during the Lenten season so that the Lord may save those dear nations, and many other places on earth, from the menace of similar conflicts!

"The fruits of faith in God should not be devastating antagonisms, but a spirit of brotherhood and collaboration for the good of all. God, Creator and Father of us all, will call to account more severely those who spill their brother’s blood in His name.

"May everyone, through the intercession of the Holy Virgin, find themselves in Him, who is the true peace."

CANADIAN GOVERNOR GENERAL MEETS WITH BENEDICT

This is kind of a cute account of their meeting this morning. As usual, Papa was too humble.
___________________________

Gov. Gen. meets with Pope

VATICAN CITY (AP) - Gov. Gen. Michaelle Jean met Monday with Pope Benedict during a Vatican audience that also included her six-year-old daughter.

Jean spoke French as well as Italian to the Pope during their 25-minute private meeting in Benedict's private library. Jean studied Italian in Montreal as well as in Italy.

As they sat down, the Governor General told the Pope she had heard he spoke 10 languages.

"Maybe three," he replied somewhat sheepishly.

Jean's husband, French-born Quebec filmmaker Jean-Daniel Lafond, escorted their daughter, Marie-Eden, into the room and she shook hands with the Pope. They later posed for a photo together, with the Pope resting his hands on the little girl's shoulders.

Jean presented Benedict with an Inuit carving of a bear - "testimony of Inuit culture," she said.

The Pope gave her a papal medal.

Benedict emerging as ‘teaching pope,’ Vatican journalist-observer says

NZ Catholic
2/27/2006

AUCKLAND, New Zealand (NZ Catholic) – Pope Benedict XVI was elected because cardinal-electors needed to find someone who would not be crushed by the weight of the man who proceeded him and is emerging as a teaching pope with “epic ambition” for the church, according to a Vatican journalist and papal biographer.

A crowd of almost 150 received “The Word from Rome” on Feb. 17 as Vatican journalist John L. Allen Jr., author of the column of the same name for National Catholic Reporter, spoke about the first 10 months of Benedict XVI’s pontificate and the church today.

Allen, who also wrote a biography of then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger in 2000 and book following his election as pontiff as well as another recent book on Opus Dei, was brought to New Zealand through the sponsorship of the NZ Catholic and the New Zealand Catholic Communications office.

Journalists, authors and analysts have offered countless suggestions as to how and why Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was chosen to succeed Pope John Paul II by the 115 electors at last April’s conclave.

Vatican correspondent Allen, in a talk entitled “Benedict XVI’s First Year: Where is he taking the church?,” pointed to the size of John Paul II’s legacy a playing a large role in the papal election.

“The impact of John Paul II influenced the cardinals,” Allen said. “There was a very real concern that they not elect someone who would be crushed by the weight of the man who had preceded him.”

Any hypothesis of a search for an interim pope with a pastoral background was not accurate, he said, because John Paul had “changed the job description” of the supreme pontiff of the Catholic Church.

“[The cardinals] were in need of a giant, and when you set the bar at the level of a giant, that narrows the field of possible candidates quickly,” Allen said.

Cardinal Ratzinger was elected, he said, from a field of about six or seven who could be described as “giants.”

The reasoning behind the election of the German pope is not as complex as others might suggest, he said. “Beside the role of the Holy Spirit, I think the shockingly simple explanation for the outcome of the conclave of 2005 is that more than two-thirds of those cardinals thought Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was simply the best and brightest they had to offer.”

The election of Cardinal Ratzinger meant that the new pope was anything but an unknown quantity, making the journalist’s job as an expert analyst simpler than it might otherwise have been, he said.

“As you know, the name of Joseph Ratzinger had been linked to every significant public controversy in Roman Catholicism in the last 25 years,” Allen said, mentioning liberation theology, the limits of theological dissent and religious pluralism as just three examples.

“To some, he was a symbol of a courageous defender of the faith; to others a symbol of the failure of nerve after the Second Vatican Council.”

Cardinal Ratzinger had become a “lightning rod” within the church, he said, and the stereotypes that emerged during his time as prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith were listed upon his election as Pope Benedict XVI: Authoritarian, dark, conservative, tough.

“And there are aspects of his pontificate that have confirmed those expectations and many, many that have confounded them,” Allen said.

Allen believes the cardinal electors were looking for someone to battle “runaway secularization”, especially in Europe; someone to lead ecclesiastical reform; and someone with a papal style different from John Paul II.

Pope Benedict XVI has certainly taken up the fight against secularization, Allen said during his talk.

“The battle for the soul of the West, the soul of Europe, has been joined by this pope,” he asserted.

The two words Benedict has consistently emphasized during his first 10 months as pontiff have been truth and love, Allen said, adding that the search for objective truth is especially important.

“The Holy Father is deeply convinced that to save the soul of the West, that cannot be done without restoring the broadly-shared confidence in the capacity of the human mind to identify objective truth and to order our lives on the basis of that truth,” Allen said.

The jury is still out on whether the pope is yet changing people’s minds, but he “has their attention,” he added. A move to reform the Roman curia has only just begun, Allen said, but noting that the pope is expected to reshape several Vatican offices, downsize some and appoint cardinals based on “what they know, not who they know.”

In terms of papal style, Allen said it has quickly emerged that Benedict will be more of a teaching pope than an evangelizing pope, placing an emphasis on the message, not the messenger, on the office and not on the man occupying that office.

He has also shown that, even as someone in his late 70s, he isn’t about to have a quiet pontificate, Allen said. “He is a pope of epic ambition; not for himself, but for the church and the challenges it faces in its time.”
_______________

Republished by Catholic Online with permission of the NZ Catholic (http://www.nzcatholic.org.nz), New Zealand’s national Catholic newspaper, a Catholic Online Preferred Publishing Partner.

WOW! John Allen beats even Sandro Magister's analysis-review of B16's first 10 months as Pope. And he was wise to look back to Papa's time at CDF and characterize him rightly as the "lightning rod" for the Church on all the issues that emerged in the past quarter-century. But his master insight is what he sees as the underlying reason for the cardinals' choise of Ratzinger to succeed JPII - "someone who would not be crushed by the weight of his predecessor " is about as bullseye-close one can get. (I wonder who the other five or six are that he refers to as the other 'giants' who might have been considered to become Pope. I did not think Tettamanzi, Martini and Bergoglio - the ones who had been touted before and after the Conclave as the most likely papabile - could be considered 'giants' in this sense. That leaves who? Ruini, Scola and Schoenborn (not in that order) are the only other persons I personally would have found acceptable had there not been a Joseph Ratzinger).

Most of all, he shows his appreciation of the real Ratzinger when he concludes that “He is a pope of epic ambition; not for himself, but for the church and the challenges it faces in its time.”

What a welcome and gratifying difference from the John Allen who wrote "Enforcer of the Faith"! It's always good to have someone with a following - who writes in a magazine whose views are way too liberal for us orthodox Catholics - on Papa's side!

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 28/02/2006 0.23]

God Loves Humans From Their Conception, Says Pope

VATICAN CITY, FEB. 27, 2006 (Zenit.org).- Benedict XVI says that God's love for people does not depend on their age, which is why the Church defends their inviolable character from conception.

"The love of God does not distinguish between the newly conceived infant still in its mother's womb, the baby, the youth, the grown adult or the elderly, because in each of them he sees the sign of his own image and likeness," the Pope said today as he addressed participants in a congress on the topic "The Human Embryo before Implantation."

About 350 scientists, doctors, bioethicists and theologians heard the Holy Father's words at the congress organized by the Pontifical Academy for Life. The two-day congress at the Vatican ends Tuesday.

"This unbounded and almost incomprehensible love of God for man shows to what point the human person is worthy of being loved for himself, regardless of any other consideration -- intelligence, beauty, health, youth, integrity, etc.," Benedict XVI said.

"In short, human life is always good, as it is a manifestation of God in the world, sign of his presence, radiance of his glory," the Pope told the gathering in Clementine Hall.

"To man, in fact, a very high dignity is given, which has its roots in the profound bond that unites him with his Creator: In man, in every man, in any phase or condition of his life, shines the reflection of the very reality of God," the Holy Father said.

"For this reason, the magisterium of the Church has constantly proclaimed the sacred and inviolable character of every human life, from its conception to its natural end," he indicated. "This moral judgment is already valid from the beginning of the life of an embryo, even before it is implanted in the maternal womb, which protects and nourishes it during nine months until the moment of birth."

Finally, the Pope invited the scientists and experts to cultivate an attitude of wonder and respect before the mystery of the origin of human life, a "mystery whose significance science will be increasingly capable of illuminating, although it will hardly be able to decipher it completely."

The Holy Father added: "We have improved our knowledge enormously and better identified the limits of our ignorance, but it seems that, for human intelligence, it has become too difficult to realize that the sign of the Creator is seen when contemplating nature.

"In reality, whoever loves truth should perceive that research on such profound topics makes it possible for us to see and almost touch the hand of God."

"Beyond the limits of the experimental methods," the Pope added, "at the confines of the area that some call meta-analysis, where sensorial perception and scientific tests are neither enough or even possible, that is where the adventure of transcendence begins, the commitment to 'go beyond.'
--------------------------------------------------------------
I will post my translation of the pope's full discourse later tonight. This weekend, I posted three introductory scientific discourses on the thene of theCongress in the FAITH AND SCIENCE thread.

OK, I found the answer to the question I posed above after the report on the Pope and the Curia's Lenten retreat this year.

JPII asked Ratzi to be retreat master in 1983, the year after he arrived in Rome to take up his post at CDF. The meditations he wrote for that retreat were published in 1986 as "Journey to Easter: Spiritual Reflections on the Lenten Season" in the English edition, which has been reissued this year and is available on amazon.com if you don't see it in your local Catholic bookstore.

From Sandro Magister's blog of yesterday, 2/27/06, on
blog.espressonline.it/weblog/stories.php?topic=03/04/09... -
an eye-opening item, here in translation:
---------------------------------------------------------------

On Friday, February 24, a Vatican statement noted that in the morning Benedict XVI had received “brother Enzo Bianchi, prior of Bose” in private audience.

After his meeting with Hans Kueng, the Pope’s audience with Bianchi shows the Pope’s interest in finding some ground of consensus wuth the most influential leaders of “liberal” and “progressive” Catholicism.

With Kueng, the common ground was Weltethos, a world ethic common to all men and all religions, to which the Swiss-German theologian has devoted many of his studies.

With Enzo Bianchi, on the other hand, the objective is internal to the Church. From the start of Benedict’s papacy, the prior of Bose has manifested his appreciation of Ratzinger as theologian and Pope. His appreciation further grew with the publication of Deus caritas est, which Bianchi greeted with an enthusiastic article that was published in La Stampa. [My translation of this article is in the following post]

Bianchi continues to have reservations and criticisms of the “reduction” of Christianity to a “civil religion” – a trend which he sees impersonated by Cardinal Camillo Ruini.

But lately, even these citicisms have appeared to be attenuated in his always prolific writings. Bianchi is a teacher with known tendencies in Italian progressivist Catholicism. Therefore his positive judgments on Benedict XVI are even more striking because they contrast with the opposite judgments repeatedly voiced against the current Pope by another guru of progressivist Catholicism, the historian Alberto Melloni.

Until a few months ago, Bianchi and Melloni were like the two gods of progressivism: they proceeded united and struck together. Both were important members of the “school of Bologna” founded by Don Giuseppe Dossetti and directed by Giuseppe Alberigo, author of an interpretation of Vatican-II which Benedict XVI has criticized harshly, before and after he became Pope.

Today however, Bianchi and Melloni have come apart. The same day that Bianchi was praising Deus caritas est in La Stampa, Melloni dismissed it in a few lines: “This encyclical leaves almost everybody unhappy. Benedict XVI has succeeded in writing about love without talking about sexual morality. It will be interesting to see if (this encyclical) will end up in oblivion, as often happened with his predecessor’s encyclicals.” [How was poor Melloni to know that within a few days of its release, the encyclical had been bought by at least half a million Italians, not counting everyone elese who read it from other free sources!]

---------------------------------------------------------------
I must confess to total ignorance about Bianchi and Bose till now, but a quick check of the Bose website (in Italian) indicates that Bianchi founded this monastic community of men and women around 1963 and that its rules were promulgated in 1975. As the introduction is rather long-winded, I was not able to figure out at a glance what exactly they stand for, except that the order seems to give great weight to "living in the desert", i.e., away from the world but not isolated.

It appears to be an ecumenical group but they are bound to poverty, chastity and obedience, and their way of life and daily schedule is literally monastic. Bose is in the commune of Magnano in northwest Italy, 65 kms. north of Torino.

My search for an appropriately brief background on Bianchi and Bose led me this excerpt from Sandro Magister himself in a March 2005 article http://www.chiesa.espressonline.it/dettaglio.jsp?id=25797&eng=y -
---------------------------------------------------------------

Enzo Bianchi does not carry any particular official authority. The monastic community that he founded – a mixed group of monks and nuns that includes Protestants and Orthodox – is far from receiving canonical approval.

But he is a leading representative of a tendency widespread throughout all levels of the Church, generally identified as “conciliar” and “ecumenical.”

His activity is highly varied and intense. He is an acclaimed writer. He has published dozens of books, some of them translated into various languages. He writes for the newspaper owned by the Turin-based FIAT automotive company, La Stampa, in spite of the fact that he is an implacable enemy of capitalism. He also writes for (Avvenire) the newspaper of the Italian bishops’ conference, even though he is the greatest critic of both it and its president, Cardinal Camillo Ruini. Dozens of bishops and hundreds of priests have attended his retreats.

A constant stream of illustrious visitors passes through Bose. The patriarch of Constantinople, Bartholomew I, has been there. Rowan Williams, archbishop of Canterbury and one of Bianchi’s close friends, spent several weeks there prior to his installation as the new primate of the Anglican Church, and has returned a number of times since then. Regular visitors from the Vatican include Archbishop Michael Fitzgerald, president of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, Piero Marini, the pope’s master of ceremonies, and Renato Boccardo, the new secretary of the administrative center of Vatican City.

When he was archbishop of Milan, Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini also demonstrated a certain predilection for Bianchi and the monastery of Bose. After September 11, 2001, Martini made a stir with a homily in which, quoting Bianchi, he defined the destruction of the Twin Towers as an “apocalypse in the etymological sense of ‘lifting a veil’,” a “revelation of the evil in which we are immersed, of the absurdity of a society whose god is money, whose law is success, and whose time is marked by the opening of the worldwide stock exchanges.”

In 1982, Bianchi became the successor of Fr. Giuseppe Dossetti as president of the Institute of Religious Studies in Bologna, the most influential center of study in the world of “conciliar” tendency. In a book released at the end of 2004, the center made public its plan for reforming the papacy which it delivered in August of 1978 to the cardinals who took part in the two conclaves of that year. In the minds of its authors, this plan should be valid just as it is for the next conclave.

Bianchi is a radical critic of what he calls the “Constantinian era” of the Church, which lasted from the 4th century until the second half of the 20th century, and which he believes is perpetuated today in the new historical sin of “civil religion” in support of the modern “emperors.”

And yet, in spite of his strongly critical positions, Bianchi is highly regarded in certain Vatican offices. The Pontifical Council for Christian Unity, headed by Cardinal Walter Kasper, asked him to deliver an address last November marking the fortieth anniversary of the conciliar decree “Unitatis Redintegratio.” And in August, Bianchi took part in the official Vatican delegation that went to Moscow to deliver the icon of the Mother of God of Kazan to Patriarch Alexei II.
----------------------------------------------------------------

Magister's article pitted Bianchi's views against that of a -surprise! - leading American Jesuit, Fr. Drew Christensen, associate editor of the magazine America, who had written an article denouncing the attack against Christianity and the Catholic Church by religious intolerance and “dogmatic secularism,” throughout the world and especially in Europe.

Bianchi countered by denying this, saying there has been no such attack in the past – “for centuries Christians have lived freely and been respected” – and much less is there one today. [I truly can't see how he can deny this!] In his opinion, it is rather the Church that stubbornly insists upon retaining its privileges and its close ties with the dominant powers.

But among the many references that Magister gives to round up the context of this debate is a sidelight on an unlikely defender of Christianity in the culture wars - Juergen Habermas, Germany's leading contemporary philosopher and co-protagonist in the now-famous January 2004 "debate" in Munich with Cardinal Ratzinger on the "Pre-Political Moral Bases of the Liberal State."

Habermas, who describes himself as "a methodical atheist," nonetheless wrote in a book-essay published in November 2004 that Christianity, and nothing else, is the ultimate foundation of liberty, conscience, human rights, and democracy, the benchmarks of Western civilization: "To this day, we have no other options. We continue to nourish ourselves from this source. Everything else is postmodern chatter."

It all makes very good reading...

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 01/03/2006 6.11]

Here is a translation of the commentary to Deus caritas est that Brother Enzo Bianchi published in La Stampa on 1/26/06:

A CHURCH NOT A LOBBY
By Enzo Bianchi

St. Jerome, that great father of the Church, says that when the Apostle John, already an old man carried on the shoulders of his disciples to liturgical assembly, would limit himself in his homilies to repeating, “God is love. Children, love one another!”

Benedict XVI has started his Petrine ministry at a venerable age and, in a highly significant way, has wanted his first encyclical to remind Christians – to whom the letter is addressed – of the essence of Christian faith, that which makes it unique among all religions, even others that are also monotheistic, that which is the synthesis of all Christian existence.

We had expected of Benedict XVI an encyclical that would be the fruit of a whole life as theologian and bishop, but its simple and clear style, its positive tone, an outlook nourished by macrothymia – a greatness of spirit in seeing and feeling, the absence of polemic and any apologetic spirit, all show the novelty of his ministry: he is teaching that Christianity is truly the good news, offered and communicated well to everyone.

In recent days, in a speech to the Pontifical Council Cor Unum, the Pope exoressed his intentions in offering the encyclical: “I wanted to show the humanity of our faith” (note the newness of this expression). In an epoch in which “the word love has been so exhausted and abused,“ the Pope decided to return to love – the source of faith and Christian hope – in re-stating that God is love, and because of this, he chose to assume a human face, to take on human flesh, in Jesus.

Some may be dissatisfied with a text which, on superficial reading, may appear to be hardly pragmatic, almost abstract. Whoever thinks that the life of the Church should be above all else institutional, depending only on its historic form, may perhaps be disappointed, but it seems to me that this is the way Benedict XVI has chosen to give a clear sign about his Pontificate, which also has ecumenical valence: the Church of Rome, which from the start of the second century was defined as the church which presides in love, should show above all, through its Bishop, a magisterium of love, and affirm that Christians are in this world as men and women capable of exercising ars amandi, the art of loving individually as well as in the history that they make together with other human beings.

Therefore, in the first part of the encyclical, Benedict XVI offers a contemplative theological lecture on love. “God is love” was the Johannine revelation, but from this comes the fact that love – always the love of God and one’s neighbor, always love that has God as its source - is the life of the Christian. Love is not just a commandment, but it is a response to the one who loved us first, God, a response to the love described to us by Jesus, “a man for all others” who gave and sacrificed his own life for his brothers in humanity.

This love does not recognize the contraposition between eros (passional human love) and agape (freely-given divine love) because, as the fathers of the Greek church understood, even in God there is eros, indeed, there is a “mad” love for humanity. Only when eros is left uncontrolled and blind, then it degrades, it objectifies man. Likewise, agape, if it disdains what is human, the body, passion, desire, then it also betrays divine love.

This is a text that is a great gift offered, I dare to say, even to non-Christians, because love concerns us all, and to meditate on love is to ask oneself what makes sense to man and what does not, what is it that keeps us on our feet and what it is that can destroy our lives. When man wants to make history, when he wants to build a community, when he looks for happiness, he must confront his own experience of being loved and of loving.

Even the second part of the encyclical, beyond its limpid discourse on deaconry in the church, contains statements that reveal to the non-Christian how the Church construes its presence in their midst. The Pope affirms that the Church “does not wish to impose its perspectives and ways of behavior on those who do not share the faith. It simply wishes to contribute to the purification of reason and extend its own help so that, yes indeed, that which is just and right may, here and now, be recognized and even later on made real.” He continues: “The Church cannot and should not take into its hands the political battle for realizing the most just society possible,“ (for) this is not the task of the Church but should be realized through politics.”

Here then is the vision expressed by Benedict XVI of his Petrine magisterium: a church that does not impose but proposes, which does not make itself the ruling force in society nor follow the course of pressure lobbying, a church which is in the midst of the faithful, gaining sympathy for them, a church free of parties and ideologies, which takes on its commitment to charity without ulterior motives but in the humility of concrete services that are never dissociated from thought, meditation, contemplation and prayer.

Yes, indeed, in front of a text like this, every Christian can rejoice: it is good evangelical news which is communicated well. And who is not Christian can perceive in it all the sympathy that the Church has towards him, can feel the Church’s authentic passion towards all of humanity.

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 01/03/2006 6.09]

On 2/19/06, we posted this on this thread:

---

Noteworthy in the 2006 Annuario Pontificio, the official annual directory of Catholic prelates,
released yesterday, is the fact that the title "Patriarch of the Occident" no longer appears
among the formal titles of the Pope.

Benedict XVI is described in the directory as -
Bishop of Rome
Vicar of Jesus Christ
Successor of the Prince of Apostles
Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church
Primate of Italy
Metropolitan Archbishop of the Province of Rome
Sovereign of Vatican City
Servant of the Servants of God

This is followed by data on Joseph Ratzinger's ecclesiastical biography up to his election as Pope.

The title "Patriarch of the Occident" has been abolished, it seems, because it appeared
to discriminate in favor of only the Western Church, but the Pope is head of the
Universal Church,but better still, in the spirit of ecumenism, to avoid any contraposition
with the Patriarchs of the Eastern Churches.

---

Luigi Accatoli writes about this today in Corriere della Sera, providing background information about it, but also raising the question of whether doing away with the title Patriarch of the Occident will be seen as negative by the Eastern and Orthodox Churches. [It’s been more than one week since this became news, but no one has reacted adversely so far!] Here is a translation-
----------------------------------------------------------------

By Luigi Accatoli

The Pope’s official titles have been reduced from 9 to 8. Benedict XVI has renounced the title of “Patriarch of the Occident.” This title, which is 1466 years old, no longer appears in the 2006 Pontifical Directory just published by the Vatican.

The change, decided on by the theologian Pope, may have negative repercussions in the Church’s relationship with Orthodoxy and its Patriarchates, “depending on how it is presented,” according to experts in this matter.

Someone who has a copy of the new directory read us over the phone the titles which accompany the name of Benedict XVI in the opening pages of the directory… Previously, there had been 9 titles; “Patriarch of the Occident” was listed between”Supreme Pontiff” and “Primate of Italy.”

“It is not properly a papal title,” was the opinion of the Dominican theologian Yves Congar, who was made a cardinal by Pope Paul VI. It is, in fact, a title that was attributed to the Roman Pope by the Oriental Catholics, who think of the church in terms of Patriarchates.

Congar, in an essay on “the titles given to the Pope”, published in the magazine Concilium in 1975, reconstructed that the first ”Bishop of Rome” to be called “Patriarch of the Occident” was Leo the Great (Attila’s Pope) in a letter dated 450 from the Emperor of the Orient Theodosius II.

In the view of the Church of the first millenium, there were five principal patriarchates: Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem. But Rome was considered a Patriarchate in reference to the others and by the others, not of its own initiative and without that title, although it entered the official nomenclature, ever having been “appropriated” in the West.

A critical “closure” to the title “Patriarch of the Occident” was developed by the Franciscan theologian Adriano Garuti who teaches at the Lateran University, in a book “Is the Pope Patriarch of the Occident?: A historical study in doctrine”, published in 1990. Garuti argues that the title has “neither historic nor doctrinal basis” and had posed the question of whether it should continue to be among the Pope’s official titles.

In the latest edition of his book “The new people of God” (Italian translation published by Queriniana), Cardinal Ratzinger cites Garuti’s work in a footnote. Garuti tells us that he was not involved in the recent papal decision, but he thinks it is plausible that Benedict XVI may have shared his argument, in part, and that maybe Papa Ratzinger has decided that keeping that questionable title could lead to misunderstanding.

But it is not hard to imagine that discarding the title could be interpreted badly by the patriarchs of the East, whether Orthodox or Eastern-rite Catholics. That world is very attached to tradition and they could interpret the Pope’s decision as an affirmation of his superior rank compared to “Patriarchs”, and therefore indirectly, as an affirmation of himself as “universal Patriarch.”

Experts whom we questioned reject the suggestion that the Pope may have intended, among other things, to distance the Church from “the West”, as it is understood today in the context of the current debate over a conflict of civilizations, meaning between the European-American West and Islam.

The discarded Papal title refers to the Christian West and East as it was understood in the first millenium of Christianity. And it is precisely in this historical perspective that one may understand the theologian-Pope’s conviction that a title attributed to the Bishop of Rome by a Byzantine emperor 15 centuries ago no longer corresponds to the situation in the third millenium.

As for changes in Papal titles, one must remember that John XXIII changed the expression “gloriously reigning” to “servant of the servants of God”, and Paul VI abrogated the expression “the Holiness of our Lord” (la Santita di Nostro Signore, now shortened simply to Holiness) which up to then was used for the Popes.

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 02/03/2006 6.04]

To mark Pope Benedict's first Lent as Pope, an image of him receiving the ashes today from Cardinal Tomko, then sayihg Mass:

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 02/03/2006 6.02]

thanks Teresa,was able to watch the Ash Wednesday mass yesterday..it was a long day for Papa he looked tired towards the end but still focused on his work and duty!

Yet another belated acknowledgment of a bit of news this forum reported as early as Feb. 19, this time from, of all places, ANSA, the Italian news agency that is their euqivalent of the Associated Press. Here is what they published in their March 1 'news in English':
----------------------------------------------------------------
Pope drops a title
Benedict does not want to be called Patriarch of the West

(ANSA) - Vatican City, March 1 - Pope Benedict XVI has ordered one of his nine official titles to be dropped .

In the new edition of the Vatican yearbook, the German pontiff is no longer referred to as Patriarch of the West .

He is simply Bishop of Rome, Vicar of Jesus Christ, Successor of the Prince of Apostles, Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church, Primate of Italy, Metropolitan Archbishop of the Roman Province, Sovereign of Vatican City and Servant of the Servants of God .

According to sources in the Vatican publishing house, the move -noticed by only the most observant of Vatican-watchers - was requested by the pope himself .

It is seen as a sign of Benedict's desire to overcome the 992-year division between Roman Catholics and Orthodox Christians .

It is a "sign of ecumenical sensitivity", officials said .

"In the past the patriarchate of the West was contrasted with that of the East. I think the pope wanted to remove this sort of contrast and his act is intended as a spur to ecumenical progress," said Cardinal Achille Silvestrini. "The Catholic Church does not consider itself the Church of the West," said the cardinal, who is head of the Vatican department dealing with Eastern branches of Catholicism .

Dropping the Patriarch of the West title was reportedly also considered by Benedict's predecessor, John Paul II, who made significant inroads in promoting dialogue between Orthodox Christians and the Catholic Church .

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 02/03/2006 14.59]