The Mass of Saint Pius V:
French bishops raise
their voices against it
They want to maintain the right of veto
against the use of the Tridentine missal.
But Benedict XVI is set to liberalize it.
Cardinal Arinze's Paris harangue against
postconciliar liturgical abuses.

by Sandro Magister


ROMA, November 13 – The French bishops met in plenary assembly last week, in shock over the news that Benedict XVI is about to grant wider authorization to the celebration of the Mass ‘of Saint Pius V.’

The French bishops feel themselves to be particularly affected by this news because it is in France that the liturgical renewal before and after Vatican Council II has seen some of its strongest development.

Because it is in France that there arose the traditionalist schism of archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, an extremely staunch defender of the rite that is also called ‘Tridentine’, in that it was established by the Council of Trent in the sixteenth century.

And because it is in France that the faithful of traditionalist stamp are the most numerous and volatile with respect to the aggregate of the practicing faithful, who have fallen well below ten percent of the population.

For a good number of the French bishops, the go-ahead for the Tridentine rite would endanger not only the liturgical reform of Vatican II, but the very unity of the Church itself.

The bishops of Strasbourg, Metz, and the ecclesiastical province of Besançon – who are among the most inflamed over this issue – put their views in black and white in a message of protest they released on October 25:

“The bishops are afraid that the generalization of the Roman missal of 1962 would attenuate the guidelines of Vatican Council II. Such a decision would also risk endangering the unity among the priests, and among the faithful as well.” [Have these bishops since looked at the results of a poll conducted after their widely-publicized protest that more than 60% of the French Catholics polled said they would be interested in attending a Tridentine Mass? Why do they talk about a rite that has been hallowed over centuries as if it were a plague from the devil? What, other than stubbornly closed minds and sheer laziness, could bring on such a disproportionate reaction to something whose actual details no one knows nothing about just yet? And yet, let no one underestimate Benedict's resourcefulness]

Two days earlier, on Monday, October 23, Benedict XVI had received at the Vatican cardinal Jean-Marie Lustiger, the former archbishop of Paris. And on Thursday the 26th the pope had been visited by cardinal Jean-Pierre Ricard, archbishop of Bordeaux and president of the French bishops’ conference. Both expressed the fears of their brother bishops over the announced pontifical “Motu Proprio.”

That same day, October 26, a conference on the same explosive terrain opened in Paris. The occasion of the conference was the 50-year anniversary of the Institut Supérieur de Liturgie.

Among those who spoke at this conference were the archbishop of Paris and president of the institute, André Vingt-Trois; the archbishop of Toulouse and head of liturgical matters for the bishops’ conference, Robert Le Gall; and the prefect of the Vatican congregation for divine worship, cardinal Francis Arinze.

In his address, Vingt-Trois admitted that the liturgical renewal that had been implemented in France over the past decades had seen developments that were “sometimes clumsy or crude, which may have given the impression of a rupture with tradition.”

He also recognized that “in some liturgical gimmicks or tendencies one has been able to identify the assembly’s celebration of itself, instead of the celebration of the work of God – means the proclamation of a new model of the Church.”

But then he continued, to the applause of those present:

“On the other hand, one has witnessed a radical criticism of Vatican Council II, a pure and simple rejection of some of its declarations, under the pretext of mobilization in defense of a form of the liturgy.

"The rejection of validly promulgated liturgical books was followed by public insults against the popes, and crowned by acts of violence such as the forcible seizure of a parish church in Paris.

"...None of the protagonists of these uprisings either believed or stated that the problem was primarily, much less exclusively, liturgical. It was, and remains, an ecclesiological problem. It clearly poses the question of the meaning of ecclesial unity in communion with the see of Peter. It clearly poses the question of the authority of an ecumenical council.”

But the address by cardinal Arinze fell like a cold shower on many of those present. [Teresa's note: I had been meaning to translate Cardinal Arinze's discourse since Beatrice posted the French original text on her website, as I suspect it reflects much of what will likely be contained about the liturgy in the Pope's forthcoming Post-Synodal exhortation.]

Here are some of the passages from Cardinal Arinze's address :

“The sacred liturgy is not something that has been invented...”

“Many of the abuses in the liturgical domain have arisen, not from ill will, but from ignorance...”

“We must distance ourselves from that coldness, that horizontalism that places man at the center of the liturgical action, and also from the openly egocentric showmanship that our Sunday assemblies are sometimes obliged to witness...”

“Unfortunately, many homilies seem like addresses marked by considerations of sociology, psychology, or – even worse – politics. Sometimes they are delivered by members of the lay faithful, who are not even authorized to deliver the homily, which is reserved for those who have received ordination...”

“For a priest to try to share with the lay faithful the role that he exercises in the liturgy by virtue of his being a priest, and which is strictly reserved to him, is evidence of false humility and of an inadmissible conception of democracy or fraternity... “

“If one weakens the role of the priest or fails to appreciate it, a local Catholic community can sink dangerously into the idea that it is possible to envision a community without a priest...”

Cardinal Arinze repeatedly cited the 2003 encyclical by John Paul II, Ecclesia de Eucharistia, an encyclical whose “primary purpose” – according to the authoritative theologian Giuseppe Colombo – was to “denounce what is probably the most widespread abuse in today’s Church: that of celebrating the Mass without an ordained priest.”

After these stormy introductions, on Saturday, November 4 , cardinal Ricard dedicated a good portion of his opening address for the plenary assembly of the French bishops in Lourdes to the feared liberalization of the Tridentine Mass by the pope.

He said, among other things:

“The decision to liberalize the possibility for priests to say the Mass according to the 1962 missal has not yet been made. The announced Motu Proprio has not been signed. Its plan will be the object of various consultations. And, beginning now, we can make known our own fears and hopes.

“This project [of liberalization] is not being created with the intention of criticizing what is referred to as ‘the missal of Paul VI’, nor of proceeding with a reform of the liturgical reform.

"The liturgical books that were composed and diffused after Vatican Council II are the ordinary, and thus the standard, form of the Roman rite. This project arises, instead, from Benedict XVI’s desire to do everything in his power to bring the Lefebvrist schism to an end.

“Contrary to the intentions that some attribute to him, Pope Benedict XVI does not intend to double back along the path that Vatican Council II set for the Church. He is solemnly engaged in following it.” [That Cardinal Ricard needed to say something so self-evident at all to an assembly of French bishops is emblematic.]

But these reassurances were not enough to put the French bishops at ease. On Thursday, November 9, in the concluding address for the plenary assembly, cardinal Ricard again stressed that “the disputes with the faithful who have followed archbishop Lefebvre in his ‘no’ to Rome are not, in the first place, liturgical, but theological, concerning religious freedom, ecumenism, interreligious dialogue.”

And this is how he formulated the requests from the French bishops to Benedict XVI:

“We hope to proceed with welcoming those who retain an attachment to the ‘Mass of Saint Pius V’. Diversity is possible – but it must be regulated. It must go together with the unity of the liturgy and the unity of the Church. One must not leave the choice of one of the forms of the Roman rite – the Mass of Saint Pius V or the Mass of Paul VI – to subjectivity alone.”

In other words, the French bishops are asking Benedict XVI not to mitigate the impediments to the use of the Tridentine missal put in place by John Paul II. [I do not understand why these impediments were even necessary!]

This rite has never been completely abrogated, neither by Vatican Council II nor by later provisions. For example, Padre Pio continued celebrating the Mass according to the rite of Saint Pius until his death, according to an indult granted to him personally by Paul VI.

But in those years, it was practically banned.

In 1984, with the letter Quattuor Abhinc Annos from the congregation for divine worship, John Paul II permitted a return to the use of the Tridentine rite, while placing this under two demanding conditions.

To celebrate the Mass according to the rite of Saint Pius V, in its latest arrangement dating to 1962, one needed in the first place to recognize “the legitimacy and doctrinal precision” of the missal promulgated by Paul VI in 1970 according to the guidelines of Vatican Council II.

But above all, one needed the permission of the local bishop.

In fact, many bishops have always refused to grant this permission to the priests and faithful who have requested it.

And this widespread refusal, particularly in France, was one of the factors that drove the followers of arch-traditionalist Archbishop Lefebvre to separate from the Church of Rome.

Benedict XVI wants to heal this schism – which is, in effect, more doctrinal than liturgical – but he also wants to grant, beginning immediately, the innocent desire of those priests and faithful who are fond of the Latin Mass in the ancient rite. He therefore has it in mind to facilitate the use of the Tridentine missal, in particular by removing the obligation to obtain permission from the local bishop.

And that has stirred up the French bishops.

But in the meantime, in Bordeaux, the diocese of cardinal Ricard, the Holy See has already authorized a group of former Lefebvrists that has returned to the Catholic Church, the community of the Good Shepherd, to celebrate the liturgy according to the Tridentine rite.

It is thus foreseeable that Benedict XVI will take a little more time, will listen to the objections from some bishops and cardinals, but in the end – probably by winter – will issue the Motu Proprio that will facilitate the use of the Tridentine rite.

He’s sure that this will do nothing but add to the plurality of rites that have always made the Church multifaceted.

The Council of Trent itself was careful not to unify the rites by force. Next to the “Roman” rite, Pius V confirmed the legitimacy of all the other rites in the Church that had been in existence for at least two centuries. And there were quite a few of these rites at the time.

The predominance of the Roman rite asserted itself gradually over the following centuries, but it was never complete. Still today, there are marked differences between the Mass in the Roman rite and the “Ambrosian” rite celebrated in the archdiocese of Milan. To this must be added the great variety of the rites of the Eastern Churches united with Rome.

This is without mentioning the incredible – and often unapproved – variety in styles of celebration that was unleashed by the liturgical reform inaugurated by Vatican Council II and by its new missal, enacted in 1970.

__________


On a number of occasions over the past few days, Benedict XVI has announced that he will soon publish the post-synodal exhortation on the Eucharist, the papal document that will finalize the worldwide synod of bishops held in Rome in October of 2005.

On this topic, see on www.chiesa:
"Synod on the Eucharist: The Pope has the last word"
www.chiesa.espressonline.it/dettaglio.jsp?id=68961&eng=y

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 14/11/2006 2.18]

VATICAN CITY, Nov. 13 (AFP) - Pope Benedict XVI has called for the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula in his first comment on the nuclear crisis there since Pyongyang conducted an atom bomb test in October.

Speaking to the new Japanese ambassador to the Vatican, Kagefumi Ueno, the pope stressed Japan's key role in promoting global peace and stability, particularly in the Far East.

"In the crises affecting this region, the Holy See encourages bilateral or multilateral negotiations, convinced that the solution should be found through peaceful means ... to achieve the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula," he said in a statement issued by the Vatican.

Praising Japan for its support of the "poorest," the pope also urged the international community to intensify humanitarian aid to the most vulnerable, "particularly in North Korea."

Before turning to the Korean nuclear crisis, Benedict spoke more generally, saying: "The search for peace among nations should be a priority in international relations.

"The crises facing the world cannot be resolved definitively through violence," he said.

The Russian ambassador to Japan, Alexander Losyukov, said in Tokyo on Monday that talks on ending North Korea's nuclear program could start early next month.

North Korea agreed to return to six-nation disarmament talks three weeks after its shock nuclear test on October 9.

The leaders of the five nations negotiating with North Korea -- China, Japan, Russia, South Korea and the United States -- are expected to discuss the resumption of six-way talks when they meet this weekend for a summit in Hanoi.

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 14/11/2006 2.15]

Strange, but the Italian news agencies reporting on the Thursday meeting of the Curia give equal billing to the Milingo problem and the Lefebvrian issue as the top priorities for discussion, whereas the following Reuters news story makes it appear that the meeting will only be all about Milingo and the question of priestly celibacy and married priests!
=============================================================

Pope, aides to discuss celibacy issues
By Phil Stewart

VATICAN CITY, Nov. 13 (Reuters) - Pope Benedict has called a meeting of Vatican advisers for a "reflection" on issues related to celibacy in the Church following a schism led by a renegade African archbishop who wants priests to be able to marry.

The meeting, to be held on Thursday, was announced by the Vatican's press office on Monday in a short statement that a spokesman said did not imply a review of current rules that priests remain celibate.

The statement said the Pope and leaders of Vatican departments would hold a "reflection on requests for dispensation from the obligation of celibacy and on requests for readmission to the priestly ministry by priests who had married."

Asked for clarification, chief Vatican spokesman Father Federico Lombardi said the meeting was not being called to consider major changes in the celibacy rule but to discuss the issue generally and certain individual cases.

The main purpose of the meeting is to discuss the ramifications of the crisis sparked when Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo ordained four married men as priests at a ceremony in Washington D.C. in September.

That prompted his automatic excommunication from the Roman Catholic Church.

Milingo rejects his excommunication, which forbids him to receive the sacraments or share in public acts of worship.

He is planning a convention for more than 1,000 married priests -- and their wives -- in New York for December 8-10.

"The Holy Father has called on Thursday, November 16 a meeting ... to examine the situation created following (Milingo's) disobedience," the statement said.

The Roman Catholic Church insists that its priests remain celibate and has ruled out letting them marry, which advocates say would make some men more willing to join the priesthood and ease the shortage of priests in many parts of the world.

Priests were permitted to wed during the first millennium, but marriage was condemned by the Church at the Second Lateran Council in 1139.

Milingo is not just a keen proponent of marriage, but tried it himself in 2001 at a mass ceremony held by the Rev. Sun Myung Moon's Unification Church. The union was never recognized by the Vatican and Milingo later rejoined the Catholic Church.

A proposal discussed, and rejected at a synod of Catholic bishops last year, suggested that the Church ordain some "viri probati" -- a Latin term referring to older, married men with families who are known to lead exemplary personal lives.

"Viri probati" also have a solid background in Catholic doctrine.

(Additional reporting by Philip Pullella)
===============================================================
I have looked in vain for the Vatican statement referred to in the above news item, but I don't see it anywhere in the Vatican website. Have you?

P.S. Now there's one - in the bulletin of 11/14/06, which says, in translation:

Last night, the Press Office of the Holy See issued the following communication:

The Holy Father has called for Thursday, November 16, a meeting of all the dicastery chiefs of the Roman Curia to examine the situation resulting from the disobedience of Mons. Emmanuel Milingo and to reflect on requests for dispensation from the obligation of (priestly) celibacy and for readmission to the prestly ministry presented by priests who were married in recent years. No other topics are on the agenda for the day.


Again the simple question: Why could such a short announcement not have been issued in the bulletin of 11/13/06, the day on which the announcement was actually made????? The inefficiency at the Vatican Press Office continues unapologetically!

P.P.S. Marco Tosatti in La Stampa today tells us the story behind the late announcement:

It came last night, shortly after 9 p.m. - certainly unusual for the Vatican, where the Press Office closes at 2 p.m. every day, and curtains go down on all 'official' business before dinner time.

The communique was brief and spare: [He quotes what is given above].

It was really an answer to speculation by the news agencies who had listed as agenda items for Thursday, besides the Milingo case, the subject of 'viri probati'(laymen of mature age who may be used for some priestly functions), as well as the Lefebvrian issue, specifically liberalizing the use of the Old Mass...

Because the latter issue is thorny and the Pope is already said to be preparing or has prepared a 'motu proprio' on the subject, it was felt necessary 'at the highest levels' in the Vatican to make clear it was not going to be part of Thursday's agenda. Besides, the Pope already discussed this during his 'day of reflection' with the full College of Cardinals on the occasion of the Consistory last March.

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 14/11/2006 23.54]

Muslim praises Pope's "thirst"
to understand Islam
By Tom Heneghan, Religion Editor
Tue Nov 14


PARIS (Reuters) - Pope Benedict is no expert on Islam but has a real thirst for understanding the religion and conducting a sincere dialogue with its followers, says a Muslim philosopher who discussed Islam and Christianity with him.

Mustapha Cherif, a former higher education minister and ambassador of his native Algeria, said the Pope showed during a meeting at the Vatican on Saturday he wanted to understand Muslim views on jihad and the role of reason in faith.

The Pope, who sparked Muslim protests in September with a speech hinting Islam was violent and irrational, also wanted to explore how the faiths could work together. He is due to visit predominately Muslim Turkey late this month.

"He is a great theologian but not an expert in Islam," Cherif, the first Muslim intellectual received by Benedict since his election in April 2005, said on Monday evening in Paris. "What touched me was his thirst to understand.

"He is a man of dialogue," Cherif, who has long been active in Christian-Muslim dialogue in France, told Reuters.

Muslim thinkers have criticized Benedict's speech in Regensburg, Germany because it drew what they said were false conclusions based on books by Christian writers about Islam.

While several Christians have written fine books on Islam, Cherif said, there was no substitute for discussing the faith with a believing Muslim. "He needs to have someone explain it to him with respect, which is what I did," he said.

Cherif said he told Benedict that jihad, usually translated in the West as holy war, was really a concept for a just war with rules on fighting and protecting non-combatants.

"This jihad is the same as what Saint Augustine said about the just war," he said, referring to the fifth-century Christian theologian Benedict wrote about in his doctoral dissertation.

"He was surprised by that and said it had to be better known," said Cherif, who asked to meet Benedict even before his Regensburg speech. "He didn't know the nuances."

During their half-hour discussion in French, Cherif said he also refuted what he called the misunderstandings that Islam was spread by the sword and that it did not value reason -- two issues Benedict referred to in his Regensburg speech.

Noting that Benedict later expressed regret for appearing to criticize Islam, Cherif said: "All we want is that he understands and doesn't repeat what he said.

"I leave the polemics to the polemicists. I accept the debate and his readiness for dialogue. The majority of Muslims want a respectful dialogue and refuse stigmatization."

Cherif said dialogue could help Christians and Muslims look beyond their recent tensions to see they are allies in a struggle against the loss of faith and rise of religious hatred.

"Misunderstandings and hatred have grown in the 15 years since the first Gulf War," he said. "We should not let these 15 years make us forget 15 centuries of common history."

And here is the Zenit story, published one day earlier, in which Chetif sounds far less condescending than he did when talking to Reuters.

Just one example: In the Reuters interview, he says flat out Benedict did not know that Augustine's concept of 'just war' was more or less what Muslims mean by jihad as actual war in defense of Islam (rather than the spiritual struggle it is supposed to primarily mean), whereas in the following story, he says the Pope 'smiled his assent" when he pointed out that jihad as defense was more or less what Augustine meant by 'just war.' Maybe he mistook a host's courtesy of letting the guest have his say as 'ignorance' on the part of the Pope! .

VATICAN CITY, NOV. 13, 2006 (Zenit.org).- Benedict XVI received in audience a Muslim philosopher from Algeria who is known for his commitment to battling religious hatred.

"I was impressed by his welcome and attention, face to face," said Mustapha Cherif, an expert on Islam at the University of Algiers, after the audience Saturday. His comments were reported in a message sent to ZENIT.

Cherif, 50, had requested the audience prior to the Muslim reactions to the Pope's address in Regensburg, Germany, on Sept. 12.

The Holy Father had read an appeal for dialogue, launched by Cherif in the Parisian newspaper Le Monde. The Algerian professor also expressed concern after Benedict XVI's decision to appoint the same cardinal to head the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue and the Pontifical Council for Culture.

The Muslim leader had interpreted this latter gesture as a lack of sensitivity by the Pope to interreligious dialogue, lessening the weight and identity of that Vatican dicastery.

The audience took place as the Holy Father prepares for his Nov. 28-Dec. 1 trip to Turkey, an overwhelmingly Muslim country.

Speaking about the audience, Cherif said that the Holy Father assured him that Christians and Muslims are "allies and friends."

However, the professor continued, "the return of racial and religious hatred, of anti-Semitism, which has as its objective Muslims in particular, is a threat to all."

Cherif said: "The Holy Father, better than any one, knows that, at the ethical level, one of the missions of the Church is to oppose this foul beast, Faustian logic and warmongering policies, the deformation of religions.

"We Muslims, I told him, are convinced that Your Holiness will say what is right in regard to the problems of the world so that injustices and racism will recede. He shared fully the idea that we have need of objective critical thought and messages of fraternity."

Cherif said he expressed his vision of Islam and "the Pope listened to me with kindness. … In regard to violence, I explained that Islam asks each one of its believers to forgive in the face of adversity, to be patient and merciful.

"In regard to collective responsibility in the face of aggressions, in order to avoid entering the logic of the wolf and the lamb [and] to protect the right of peoples' existence, Islam codifies in a strict manner recourse to the 'just war' -- which the Prophet described as 'little' jihad -- as legitimate defense."

The principle of the "just war" and not of the "holy war" implies "never being the aggressor, protecting civilians -- and in particular Christian monks, the weak -- the environment and always being equitable," said Cherif.

"St. Augustine did not propose something different. He assented with a smile," added the Muslim. "The great jihad is the effort for self-control, toward spiritual elevation, toward beautiful works. This definition seemed to him to be a salutary illumination, which should be known."

The Algerian philosopher explained that "our duty consists in criticizing vulgar blends between Islam and extremism. The Muslim community can regenerate itself and help the modern world, which is going through a tragic moment, despite the prodigious scientific progress, to reinvent a new civilization which is so necessary."

Cherif said that Benedict XVI "told me that one of the problems of our time is the extreme secularization and that we must witness with courage and reason the religious dimension of existence."

The Algerian professor said he made three proposals to the Holy Father:

-- "the holding of an interreligious colloquium on the topic of the struggle against religious hatred."

-- "the sensitization of the international community on the condemnable character of offenses and attacks against religions' sacred symbols," and on respect for the right "of freedom of expression and criticism."

-- The "expansion of groups and networks of friendship, dialogue and Muslim-Christian research throughout the world."

Cherif added: "The Holy Father told me that he shares fully our concerns, and totally supports these noble objectives. This unforgettable dialogue of faith and thought, open to others, opposed to all hatreds, is a sign of hope."

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 18/11/2006 21.57]

15 November, 2006
VATICAN
Pope says: The Holy Spirit
pushes Christians
towards love, communion and hope

At the general audience, Benedict XVI illustrated the teachings of Paul about the third person of the Trinity, who does not only urge mission and communion but moves in the innermost personality of Christians.



Vatican City (AsiaNews) – Prompting Christians towards mission, urging communion and love for one another: these are some of the manifestations of the works of the Spirit, who however also moves in the personality of the believer.

The third person of the Trinity, “soul of our soul”, orients our life “towards the great values of love, joy, communion and hope… It is up to us to experience it every day, going along with interior prompting”.

The Holy Spirit, illustrated in St Paul, was the theme of today’s speech by Benedict XVI to around 25,000 people present in St Peter’s square for the general audience.

Addressing the festive crowd on a splendid, sunny morning, the pope, for the third week, spoke about Paul, describing him as a “a giant not only on the level of concrete apostolate but also on the level of theological doctrine, extraordinarily profound and stimulating.”

....

A full translation of the Pope's catechesis has been posted in AUDIENCE AND ANGELUS TEXTS -
freeforumzone.leonardo.it/viewmessaggi.aspx?f=65482&idd=...

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 15/11/2006 23.03]

Earlier references to this can be found in PEOPLE AROUND THE POPE
freeforumzone.leonardo.it/viewmessaggi.aspx?f=65482&idd=...

It concerns an Italian TV comedian who fancies himself an impersonator and who has apparently been doing the most tasteless, vulgar, pointless and far-from-funny impersonations of Benedict.

Here is how Avvenire described a typical skit:
"... Benedict XVI is shown as a hysterical character assisted by two cardinals acting like acolytes, someone preoccupied with making up good lines for his public speeches, out of touch with the world, someone who moves like a puppet, with a ring on every finger..."

Other episodes have apparently shown a Pope terrified of his incapacity to ever measure up to his predecessor, or standing tongue-tied at his study window at Angelus, at a total loss for words!

The vulgarity and open disrespect for the Pope is aggravated by the pointlessness of the skits which most Italian media are dignifying by calling 'satire' rather than what it is - parody meant to ridicule the Pope. Which is neither clever nor funny. But the point probably is not to be clever or funny but to attract attention. Which it certainly has from the media.

Lella shares with us a commentary from Il Foglio of 11/14/06, translated here:


Satire targets the Pope's
'inability to communicate'
Is it because he speaks too simply?


"In our Christian families, we teach our young to always thank the Lord before starting a meal with a brief prayer and the sign of the Cross... (so that) it may educate us not to take our 'daily bread' for granted."

That, for example, is what the Pope said at the Angelus on Sunday. Not that his words were intended to solve once and for all the problem of hunger in the world - we know that is the concern of the United Nations' FAO.

But it made clear to children, and their parents, what each one of us can do so that everyone may have, not 'my daily bread', but 'our daily bread'.

The Pope on marriage: "One must pray tirelessly and persevere in the daily effort of carrying on the commitments that were assumed at matrimony."

The Pope on the meaning of All Souls Day: Death no longer shows us 'the mocking grin of an enemy, but as St. Francis writes in the Canticle of Creation, the friendly face of a sister."

A Pope who is difficult to understand, who is nailed to doctrinal text, who can be ridiculed for not knowing how to communicate - assuming one grants he has something to say - this is the kind of Pope that would be the stuff of journalistic chatter, what used to be called 'satire', on and off TV.

But Benedict XVI, or Professor Ratzinger, as some in the media call him even today - in the brief reflections he offers at Angelus or in the catecheses he gives at the Wednesday general audiences - speaks about the faith and other matters in such simple and crytalline words (meaning, words that are transparent to their very depth) that even someone like Maurizio Crozza [the unfunny commedian's name] would understand.

The way the young people assembled in Cologne last year understood him when he told them: "The happiness that you seek, the happines you deserve to enjoy, has a name and a face: that of Jesus of Nazareth....I will tell you again today what I said at the start of my pontificate: 'Whoever allows Christ into his life does not lose anything, absolutely nothing of what makes life free, beautiful and great.'"

Maybe the reason they understand him is clear.

Maybe it is because Benedict XVI can explain himself in simple terms - because he sees the simplicity of faith.

To a child who asked him, during an amazing encounter with First Communicants in St. Peter's Square: "My catechist tells me that Jesus is present in the Eucharist. But how? I don't see Him!" - the Pope replied: "It is true, we don't see Him, but there are so many things we do not see but which exist and which are essential. For instance, we cannot see reason, but we have reason." Could that statement be anything less than what he said in Regensburg?

But to make fun of someone - that's part of civil rights, yes? However, how about hitting on an appropriate target? Besides, ridiculing this Pope would invariably go back to ridiculing God's Panzer, the dandy of dogma, the mummified professor who condemns everything moving.

Instead, this is a Pope who says things that ring so true about life, death, hunger, etc - that even adults would understand, that is, those who are not more concerned with reinforcing their prejudices.

For instance, when the Pope asked us to "find the necessary balance between cultivating our internal life and doing what we have to do," his sentence ended up being reported in the Internet under "Oddities"!

Recent skits about the Pope on a 'recreational' program on TV have obviously offended many viewers. That anyone should fault Benedict XVI for his inability to communicate is puzzling. Maybe because he speaks too simply?
---------------------------------------------------------------

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 15/11/2006 19.55]

Spanish ambassador admits government sought to manipulate papal comments

Madrid, Nov. 15, 2006 (CNA) - Speaking to the Spanish daily “El Mundo,” Spain’s ambassador to the Holy See, Francisco Vazquez, admitted that the government of President Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero sought to manipulate comments by Pope Benedict in order to promote his controversial “peace process” with the Basque separatist group ETA.

Vazquez denied that the Pontiff had intervened in negotiations with ETA and he said it was an “error” to manipulate the Pope’s comments, “and that was attempted,” he admitted. “The Pope simply prayed that the peace process in Spain would move ahead. There has been no Vatican intervention in the process, nor will there be,” he stressed.

Several weeks ago, the Spanish daily “El Pais,” the official government newspaper, made up a story that Pope Benedict XVI was supporting negotiations which the Spanish government initiated with ETA.

The story triggered a letter of clarification from the Bishops’ Conference of Spain which stated, “Made-up information such as this lacks all objectivity and, therefore, is entirely untrustworthy.”

I am glad to see Sandro Magister has called attention to the Holy Father's remarkable interventions last week, first with the Swiss bishops (three times he spoke to them extemporaneously in three days - one homily and two issue-centered discourses), followed by his passtoral admonitions to his fellow German bishops.

He picks out the second of the addresses to the Swiss bishops to whom the Pope spoke of what we might call broad universal issues for the Church (God and morality), and then he goes on to tackle less broad universal issues with nation-specific applications in talking to the German bishops. [Of course, I think the Pope's treatment of the first theme in the address to the Swiss bishops, God, deserves a separate examination!]

Either Peace or Life –
Benedict XVI Debunks a False Dilemma
Speaking to the Swiss bishops, the pope replies to the main objection directed against the Church’s hierarchy
by the progressive Catholics. And to the German bishops, he says...

by Sandro Magister

ROMA, November 16, 2006 – In the second of his two addresses to the Swiss bishops on their “ad limina” visit, Benedict XVI replied to what is, perhaps, the objection most commonly directed against the pope and the Church hierarchy by progressive Catholic circles.

The objection is that, in the areas of life and the family, the Church’s hierarchy preaches truths defined as non-negotiable, pure, and solid, binding even in political decisions, while in the areas of peace, justice, and the protection of the environment, it waters down “Christian distinctiveness” and makes feeble statements, acquiescing to the temporal powers.

According to the progressive Catholic circles, the priority should be reversed. The Church should put in the first place the struggle for peace, justice, and the defense of nature, and should be more understanding toward modern “subjectivity” in the areas of life and the family.

Benedict XVI told the Swiss bishops that he has reflected a great deal on this. And his conviction is that, in effect, there exists in today’s world a division between “two parts of morality.”

Peace, justice, and the defense of nature are the object of what is almost a new religion, regardless of the proposed solutions, which according to the pope “are often very one-sided and are not always credible.”

But on life and the family, there is a large following for an “anti-morality” contrary to the morality proposed by the Church.

Benedict XVI’s response is that it is necessary “to reconnect these two parts of morality, and make it clear that they must be inseparably united.”

In fact, “it is only if human life is respected from conception to death that the ethics of peace is also possible and credible.”

In this, pope Joseph Ratzinger places himself squarely on the path of his predecessor.

It’s enough to recall what John Paul II said at an audience with the Movement for Life on May 22, 2003:

“Fundamental consistency demands that those who seek peace should defend life. No action in favor of peace can be effective if it does not oppose with like vigor the attacks against life in every one of its phases, from its beginning until its natural end.”

In those same months of 2003, pope Karol Wojtyla enjoyed widespread agreement over his preaching against the war in Iraq.

But when – as in the address cited – he said that action in favor of peace and that against abortion form a unity, he was immediately criticized by many of those who applauded his condemnations of the war.

Here follows the passage on the two moralities from Benedict XVI’s address to the Swiss bishops:


[G]“Our proclamation clashes
with a sort of antimorality...”

by Benedict XVI
November 9, 2006


I often hear it said that people today have a nostalgia for God, for spirituality, for religion, and that the Church, too, is again beginning to be seen as [...] a great repository of spiritual experience: it is like a tree in which birds can build their nests, even if they want to fly away again later [...].

But what turns out to be very difficult for people is the morality that the Church proclaims.

I have reflected upon this – I had already been reflecting upon it for some time – and I see with increasing clarity that, in our time, it is as if morality has been divided into two parts.

Modern society is not simply without morality, but it has, so to speak, “discovered” and professes a part of morality that, in the Church’s proclamation over the past few decades and even farther back than that, perhaps hasn’t been presented sufficiently.

These are the great themes of peace, non-violence, justice for all, concern for the poor, and respect for creation.

This has become an ethical complex that, precisely as a political force, has great power and constitutes for many the substitute for religion, or its successor.

In place of religion, which is seen as something metaphysical and otherworldly – and perhaps also as an individualistic thing – the great moral themes enter in as the essential reality that then confers dignity and commitment upon man. [...]

This morality exists, and also fascinates young people, who engage themselves on behalf of peace, non-violence, justice, the poor, creation. And these are truly great moral themes, which moreover belong to the tradition of the Church as well. Now, the methods that are advanced to solve these are often very one-sided and are not always credible, but we shouldn’t dwell upon this for now. [...]

The other part of morality, which is not rarely viewed in a fairly controversial light by politics, concerns life.

Part of this is the commitment on behalf of life, from conception to death; that is, its defense against abortion, against euthanasia, against manipulation, and against man’s self-conferred authorization to dispose of life.

The attempt is often made to justify these interventions with the apparently lofty aims of using them for the benefit of future generations, and thus is made to appear moral even the taking of the very life of man into one’s hands in order to manipulate it.

But, on the other hand, there also exists the awareness that human life is a gift that demands our respect and our love from the first moment to the last, even for the suffering, the handicapped, and the weak.

The morality of marriage and the family is also situated in this context.

Marriage is being increasingly marginalized. We are familiar with the example of some countries where the law has been modified to define marriage no longer as a bond between a man and a woman, but as a bond between persons. This obviously destroys the essential concept [of marriage], and society, from its very roots, becomes something totally different.

The awareness that sexuality, eros, and marriage as a union between man and woman go together – “The two shall be one flesh,” says Genesis – this awareness is continually weakening. Any sort of bond seems absolutely normal, and this is all presented as a sort of morality of non-discrimination and a form of freedom that is due to man.

With this, naturally, the indissolubility of marriage has become an almost utopian idea that appears to be disowned, even by many people in public life. In this way, the family itself is gradually falling apart.

Of course, there are various explanations for the startling decline in birth rates, but a decisive role is certainly played in this by the desire to possess life for oneself, by the lack of confidence in the future, and by the conviction that it is almost impossible to establish the family as a lasting community in which the future generation can grow up.

In these areas, therefore, our proclamation clashes with a contrary awareness within society, with a sort of antimorality that bases itself upon a conception of freedom as the ability to choose autonomously and without predefined guidelines, as non-discrimination, and therefore as the approval of any sort of possibility, situating itself as ethically correct by its own authority.

But the other awareness has not disappeared. It exists, and I think that we should exert ourselves in reconnecting these two parts of morality and making it clear that these must be inseparably united.

It is only if human life is respected from conception to death that the ethics of peace is also possible and credible; it is only then that non-violence can express itself in every direction; only then that we truly welcome creation, and only then that we can arrive at true justice.

I think that we are facing a great task here: on the one hand, we must not make Christianity appear as mere moralism, but as a gift in which is given to us the love that sustains us and provides us with the strength necessary to be able to “lose one’s life”; on the other hand, in this context of the gift of love, we must also progress toward concretization, the foundations of which are still provided for us by the Decalogue, which, with Christ and with the Church, we should interpret in a new and progressive way at this time.

_________


And the following day,
to the German bishops...

The day after his encounter with the Swiss bishops, on November 10, Benedict XVI also met with a group of German bishops on their “ad limina” visit.

With his countrymen, the pope dwelled upon a few issues of significant impact for the universal Church as well. These include:

1. Secularization

I maintain that the Church in Germany must consider this as a providential challenge and face it with courage. We Christians should not be afraid of the spiritual encounter with a society that conceals behind ostensible intellectual superiority its perplexity in the face of the ultimate existential questions.

The responses that the Church draws from the Gospel of the Logos truly made man have demonstrated themselves as valid with respect to the thought of the past two millennia; they are of lasting value. Strengthened by this understanding, we can give an account to all those who ask us the reason for the hope that is in us (cf. 1 Peter 3:15).”

2. Islam

This also holds true for our relations with the faithful of other religions, above all with the many Muslims who live in Germany, and whom we go to meet with respect and benevolence. They themselves, who often practice their convictions and their religious rites with great seriousness, have the right to receive our humble and firm testimony on behalf of Jesus Christ.

Delivering this with persuasive force requires a serious commitment. For this reason, in the places with a large Muslim population, Catholic interlocutors should be available who have the necessary knowledge in terms of both language and religious history to permit them to dialogue with Muslims. But this dialogue presupposes above all a solid understanding of their own Catholic faith.”

3. Religion in the schools

“Above all, we must be concerned about the study programs for the teaching of religion, which should be inspired by the Catechism of the Catholic Church, so that in the courses of study the fullness of the faith and of Church practices may be transmitted. In the past, it was not rare for the content of catechesis to be put in second place with respect to the teaching methods.

The complete and comprehensible presentation of the contents of the faith is a decisive aspect for the approval of textbooks for religious instruction. No less important is the teachers’ fidelity to the Church’s faith, and their participation in the liturgical and pastoral life of the parishes or the ecclesial communities in the area where they work.

In the Catholic schools, moreover, it is important that the introduction to the Catholic vision of the world and of the practice of the faith, as also the overall Catholic formation of the personality, be transmitted in a convincing way not only during the hour of religious instruction, but also throughout the entire school day – and not in the last place through the personal testimony of the teachers.”

4. Theological faculties

“It cannot be stressed enough that fidelity to the ‘Depositum fidei’, as this is presented by the Church’s magisterium, is the prerequisite par excellence for serious research and teaching. This fidelity is also a requirement for the intellectual honesty of anyone who is charged by the Church to carry out some task of academic instruction.

Here the bishops have the duty to give their ‘nihil obstat’ as highly placed authorities only after a conscientious examination. Only a theological faculty that feels itself obliged to respect this principle can be capable of making an authentic contribution to spiritual exchange within the universities.”

5. The seminaries

“In this regard, Vatican Council II, in its decree ‘Optatam Totius’, established important norms that, unfortunately, have not yet been completely implemented. This is particularly true of the institution of what is called the introductory course before the beginning of real and proper study.

This should not only transmit a solid understanding of the classical languages, which is expressly required for the study of philosophy and theology, but also familiarity with the catechism, together with the religious, liturgical, and sacramental practice of the Church.

In the face of the growing number of interested persons and candidates who no longer come from a traditional Catholic formation, such an introductory year is urgently needed. Furthermore, during this year the student can attain greater clarity on the vocation to the priesthood.

Besides this, the persons responsible for priestly formation have the possibility of getting an idea of the candidate, of his human maturity and his faith life. But the so-called role-playing games with a group dynamic, the groups of self-exploration, and other psychological experiments are less adapted for this purpose, and can create confusion and uncertainty instead.”

6. Priests and laity

“It is important that the specific profiles of the various missions not be confused. The homily during Holy Mass is a task assigned to the ordained minister; when a sufficient number of priests and deacons is present, the distribution of Holy Communion belongs to them. Moreover, the request continues to be advanced for the laity to be permitted to carry out functions of pastoral guidance.

In this regard, we cannot discuss the related questions solely in the light of pastoral convenience, because this is a matter of the truths of the faith, which is the same thing as saying the sacramental-hierarchical structure willed by Jesus Christ for his Church.

Because this is founded upon his will, as the apostolic ministry rests upon his mandate, both are exempt from human intervention. Only the sacrament of ordination authorizes those who receive it to speak and act ‘in persona Christi’.”

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

I have been recommending the trio of discourses to the Swiss bishops as great reading, and now that the Vatican has also provided a translation of the address to the German bishops, we have the complete package from last week's Benedictine refresher seminar on 'the essentials of faith and the ministry' for his fellow bishops.

We have the makings of a 'Manual for Catholic Priests and Bishops' if we put together the Pope's Q&A with the Val d'Aosta clergy, then with the Roman clergy, then his extemporaneous address to the priests and seminarians in Freisinf last September, the great address in Verona, and now, last week's 'seminar.'

Forgive me for carrying on about it, but I always find Benedict's talks to his fellow priests extraordinarily stimulating, and particularly exciting, because in suggesting things to his brother bishops and priests, he is telling us what he himself does and what he experiences as a priest.

I am more than ever convinced that this holy man considers himself first and foremost a priest, 'in persona Christi', and because he works hard at being all that a priest should be, he is the exemplary Pope he has shown himself to be.

Yesterday, he called attention to the commemoration of the feast day of Albertus Magnus, his fellow German. I could not help seeing analogies and have no doubt that in Benedict XVI, we have a potential Benedictus Magnus.

BENEDETTO, SEI GRANDISSIMO!



P.S. I have just read on Rocco Palmo's blog a major part of the speech given by Archbishop Pietro Sambi, the Pope's nuncio to the United States, at the opening of the anual convention of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops last Monday.t

It is no coincidence that Archbishop Sambi quotes extensively from what Benedict told new bishops who met in Rome last September, the bishops of Ireland and teh bishops of Switzerland in addressing the American bishops.

It is time for the bishops of the Catholic Church to break out of their bureaucratic straitjackets and show themselves to be true successors to the Apostles. To proclaim the Word of God, speaking from a heart that is in constant communion with God through prayer, and living a life that bears true witness to Christ. Benedict does as he preaches - there's the example.

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 16/11/2006 15.32]

John Allen had the statement as soon as the Press Office released it in Rome, and it's now almost 6 hours later, but the statement is not yet on the Vatican site!

This afternoon, at roughly 3:30 pm Rome time, the Vatican Press Office released the following communique with regard to this morning's meeting between Pope Benedict XVI and his senior advisors in the Roman Curia to discuss questions related to priestly celibacy.

COMMUNIQUE
PRESS OFFICE OF THE HOLY SEE

This morning, Nov. 16, in the Apostolic Palace, the Holy Father presided over one of the periodic meetings of the Heads of Dicasteries of the Roman Curia, for a common reflection.



The participants in the meeting received detailed information about the requests for dispensation from the obligation of celibacy received in recent years, as well as the possibility of readmission to the exercise of ministry from priests who at present find themselves in the conditions prescribed by the Church.

The value of the choice of priestly celibacy according to Catholic tradition was reaffirmed, and the exigency of a solid human and Christian formation was underlined, both for seminarians and for priests already ordained.

So, the Curia holds the line! I don't think anyone expected otherwise. But what will the Church do about Milingo? Will there be a separate announcement on that, and when?

Meanwhile, here's AP's story so far ...


VATICAN CITY, Nov. 16 (AP) — The Vatican on Thursday reaffirmed the value of celibacy for priests after a summit led by Pope Benedict XVI that was spurred by a married African archbishop who has been excommunicated from the Roman Catholic Church.

"The value of the choice of priestly celibacy, according to Catholic tradition, has been reaffirmed," the Vatican said in a brief statement summing up the three-hour meeting of senior Vatican prelates.

Pope Benedict XVI, who presided over the meeting, met with top officials in a closed-door session before the statement was issued.

The Vatican insisted before the summit that the policy itself was not open for discussion, but that the meeting was called to examine the implications of the "disobedience" by Zambian Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo.

Milingo incurred automatic excommunication in September when he ordained four married American men as bishops in defiance of the Vatican.

He already had drawn the Vatican's ire in 2001, when he took a South Korean woman as his wife in a group wedding ceremony of the Unification Church of the Rev. Sun Myung Moon.

The prelate is thinking big in his campaign to have the Church to drop the demand that clergy be celibate. He is hoping to draw some 1,000 married Catholic priests to a Dec. 8-10 gathering in the New York City area.

The Holy See had stressed that the summit on Thursday would not open up debate on the celibacy requirement, but would instead examine requests for dispensation made by priests wishing to marry and requests for readmission by clergy who had married in recent years. It cited no numbers.

A Vatican meeting of bishops from around the world last year rejected suggestions that the celibacy requirement be dropped for priests. Proponents argue that allowing men to marry in the priesthood could help relieve a shortage of clergy in many parts of the world.

A leader of a U.S. organization of married priests said Wednesday there were about 100,000 married priests worldwide. Stuart O'Brien, a board member of the Massachusetts-based Corpus, said he did not expect any changes to come out of the Vatican summit on Thursday, even though "Milingo has their attention."

Referring to an estimated 25,000 men who left the active priesthood in the United States to marry, O'Brien said in a telephone interview from the U.S.: "I don't think that Rome will ever open the door to them."

Louise Haggett, head of the advocacy group Citi ministries (for Celibacy is the Issue), contended that while decades ago, priests seeking dispensations "usually received it within a year," since the 1978-2005 papacy of John Paul II the waiting time has stretched to years.

"There are a lot of priests today who don't even bother to put in a request," Haggett said by phone from her base in Maine.

When Milingo was excommunicated, several Vatican watchers said the Holy See was worried about the possibility that the archbishop, with the power to ordain bishops and priests, could start a schism.

The Vatican requires celibacy of priests ordained under the Latin rite, although married men can become priests in the Eastern rite. The Vatican has also accepted some married Anglican priests who came over to the Catholic fold.

"What I think will eventually happen is that they (the Vatican hierarchy) will change, and they will allow (married) men of virtue to be ordained, older men, maybe deacons, who have proven themselves in parish work," O'Brien said.

Several bishops at the Vatican gathering last year raised the possibility that married men of proven virtue, known in Latin as "viri probati," could be ordained, but that idea was ruled out.

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 16/11/2006 20.43]

Moscow, November 16, Interfax - Patriarch of Moscow and all Russia Alexy II has thanked Pope of Rome Benedict XVI for donating 10,000 euros to the reconstruction of the Trinity Cathedral in St. Petersburg that was damaged in this August's fire.

"I cordially thank you for the donation to the reconstruction of the fire-stricken Trinity (Izmailovsky) Cathedral in St. Petersburg, which is a unique architectural monument," runs a message posted on the Moscow Patriarchate website on Thursday.

Alexy II said he views the Pontiff's contribution to the reconstruction of "the house of God as a sign of sincere love for the Russian Orthodox Church, which, obviously, may be a token of further development of our relations in the spirit of Christian brotherhood and mutual assistance."

"I would like to use this occasion to express my deep respect for Your Holiness and wish God's help to your eminent and conscientious ministry," the Patriarch said.

Pope says despite progress Christian unity faces new challenges

By Cindy Wooden
Catholic News Service

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- Despite 40 years of real progress toward Christian unity, growing differences among Christians over ethical questions and disciplinary matters have created new challenges in ecumenism, Pope Benedict XVI said.

While the Roman Catholic-Orthodox dialogue has found new energy and new hope, the church's dialogue with the Protestant and Anglican communities has led to a discovery of shared faith and "the more precise identification of real differences," the pope said.

Pope Benedict met Nov. 17 with members of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, which was holding its plenary meeting at the Vatican.

The pope, who served as an expert at the Second Vatican Council, marveled at how much had had been accomplished in just over 40 years.

Observers from other churches and Christian communities were present at the council, "attentive, but silent," he said. "The silence has been transformed into a word of communion."

"An enormous work has been accomplished on a universal level and a local level," with Christians praying together, exploring theological questions together and working together in mission and social service, he said.

Pope Benedict said he was confident that his late-November visit to Istanbul, Turkey, to meet and pray with Orthodox Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople would "speed up the move toward the re-establishment of full communion" with the Orthodox churches.

But looking at ecumenism globally, the pope said, "we must recognize that there is still much ground to cover."

Even as Catholics and members of the Protestant and Anglican communities overcome old prejudices and discover how much of the faith they share, "there have emerged various important problems that require probing and agreement," he said.

The ordination of women as priests and bishops, which has threatened the unity of the Anglican Communion, and more open attitudes toward homosexuality in the Anglican and other churches have been raised by Vatican officials as new barriers to full unity.

The issues are not simply matters of preference and discipline, but involve questions of how Scripture is understood and applied and how decisions should be made in the church.

The pope spoke of "the difficulty of finding a common understanding of the relationship between the Gospel and the church and, in relation to that, of the mystery of the church and its unity and of ministry in the church."

"New difficulties also have appeared in the ethical field," with different Christian confessions taking different stances, which weakens the ability of Christians to speak to the public with one voice, he said.

Cardinal Walter Kasper, president of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, told the pope that, while Catholics and the other Western Christian communities increasingly long for unity, in matters of doctrine and ethics some "are abandoning elements that up until now were considered a common heritage."

Pope Benedict told the council members the most important thing is to promote "the ecumenism of love" in obedience to Christ's command that his disciples love one another.

In a dialogue of love, he said, Christians will be motivated to seek the truth.

In addition, he said, "spiritual ecumenism," which involves love, joint prayer and the conversion of hearts, is essential.

Cardinal Kasper told the pope that a new document from his council, a "guide to spiritual ecumenism," was just about ready for publication and would be "a concrete help" to parishes and dioceses.

The Pope Lays Down the Law on Celibacy

A shortage of priests has some calling for a loosening of the traditional restrictions, but Benedict makes clear it won't happen on his watch

By JEFF ISRAELY/ROME
TIME magazine
Thursday, Nov. 16, 2006

Benedict: Why He Won't Liberalize the Church

Pope Benedict XVI believes Catholicism is growing sick in its historic birthplace of Western Europe, where a shortage of priests is both a symptom and an aggravating condition. But the 79-year-old pope made clear Thursday that he does not think opening up the Church to a married priesthood is the cure. After a roundtable with top Roman Curia cardinals to discuss the case of renegade Zambian archbishop Emanuel Milingo, who was excommunicated in September for having ordained four married men, the Vatican publicly reaffirmed "the value of the choice of priestly celibacy."

In normal circumstances, Milingo's taste for the spotlight might cause the Vatican to simply ignore him. But the fact that the Pope called the meeting in the first place is telling. The question of specific dispensations and the broader question of celibacy is not a matter of fixed church doctrine, but has long been a tradition in the Latin church, while Eastern rite churches allow married men to become priests. Church insiders say that a small core of progressive Cardinals have been trying to open up discussion of the rules going well back into John Paul's papacy. Some observers even speak of the risk of a new schism with Milingo's departure, though he is largely considered an unpredictable and isolated figure who's lost much of his original following.

His becoming a de facto public spokesman for those opposing the Church's centuries-old tradition of priestly celibacy, however, may have offered Benedict a unique opportunity to clearly state his position on this hot-button request early in his papacy, as John Paul II did in his second year in office. Vatican sources note that there are several prominent Cardinals who want to at least fine tune the policy on celibacy. "I don't think the Pope cares about Milingo," says one senior Vatican official. "But he wants to give the Cardinals a chance to have their say. It's better to respond head-on."

The plot of the African Archbishop's soap opera, which could be dubbed "As Milingo turns," has been twisting for years. Attentive viewers may remember that Milingo, who'd built a loyal international following for his passionate sermons and purported faith-healing prowess, shocked the Catholic Church in 2001 by suddenly marrying a South Korean woman in Rev. Sun Myung Moon's Unification Church. Milingo later patched things up with the Vatican, which simply never recognized his marriage to his handpicked bride, who held a weeks-long sit-in protest in St. Peter's Square, demanding her husband back. Milingo later published a book in which he repented his marital vows, and was eventually placed in a backwater Italian diocese where Church officials could keep an eye on him. But two months ago, Milingo, 76, burst back on the scene, ordaining four married American men as bishops in defiance of the Vatican. He was automatically excommunicated. He says he doesn't recognize the excommunication, and has organized a convention for more than 1,000 married priests — and their wives — in New York for December 8-10.

That show of support, however, isn't likely to sway the Vatican's thinking. Regardless of the shortage of future ranks for the priesthood, most Cardinals do not see allowing married men into the priesthood as the solution. "The value of the choice of priestly celibacy, according Catholic tradition, has been reaffirmed, and the need for solid human and Christian training, for seminarians as well as already ordained priests, has been reiterated," the Vatican said in its statement released Thursday afternoon, which did not mention Milingo. The note also cited discussion in the meeting of the requests of dispensation from the obligation of celibacy by those who leave the priesthood, as well as the rare readmission to their ministries for formerly married priests whose wives may have died and "who now meet the conditions required by the church," the statement said.

The debate is unlikely to take on much steam under the current reign, though supporters of loosening the celibacy vows say that Benedict officially addressing the issue helps keep it alive for the future. One Vatican source told TIME that a surprising sign of support for the progressives on this issue may be coming from one of Benedict's most loyal deputies and a noted traditionalist, Vienna's Cardinal Cristoph Schonborn. Austria, coincidentally or not, is one of the countries most sorely in need of priests. So while the latest Milingo chapter may be over, there may be more plot twists to come.

Thanks, Benefan, for Israely's article. He keeps a good perspective. I am surprised - and would be greatly disillusioned if it is true - about that last bit regarding CArdinal Schoenborn's position on celibacy. If the priest shortage in Austria is a problem, it can look to Poland for help, as other European countries have.

Could you also check out the New York Times story on the celibacy issue as I can't access the full story? I am itnterested particularly in how it treats the Milingo angle. Thanks again.
==============================================================

The Pope this morning gave a very significant address on ecumenism to the members of the Pontifical Council for Christian Unity. Particularly in view of his coming visit with Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I.

I was actually checking out the Yahoo round-up if any of the wire services has done a story on it - not one, so far - and that's how I saw the NYT link.

For those who are interested, I have posted a full translation of the address in HOMILIES, DISCOURSES AND MESSAGES.

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 17/11/2006 21.20]

Vatican Reaffirms Celibacy for Priests

By ELISABETTA POVOLEDO
New York Times

ROME, Nov. 16 — The Vatican reiterated its position today on celibacy for the clergy, addressing the challenge from a renegade archbishop who has been lobbying to persuade the church to accept marriage for Roman Catholic priests.

“The value of the choice of priestly celibacy, according to the Catholic tradition, has been reaffirmed,” the Vatican said in a statement released after a three-hour meeting attended by Pope Benedict XVI and top-ranking cardinals and prelates at the Holy See.

The statement said the Vatican also reiterated “the need for solid human and Christian training for seminarians as well as already ordained priests.”

The meeting had been called by the pope to deal with the “the disobedience” of Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo, who was excommunicated in September after ordaining four bishops without authorization.

Mr. Milingo, who is from Zambia, was married in 2001 in a mass ceremony conducted by the Rev. Sun Myung Moon’s Unification Church and now leads an organization called Married Priests Now.

According to a statement from his group, Mr. Milingo’s organization aims to reinstate what it says are 150,000 validly ordained married priests “in the public sacred ministry, working in every way possible with the church,” to offset the growing shortage of priests within the Catholic Church.

The Vatican’s statement said the participants at today’s meeting had discussed the “possibility for readmission to the exercise of the ministry” of married priests but gave no details on the outcome of the discussion.

The brief statement said the meeting also addressed “requests for dispensation from celibacy” which men leaving the priesthood must request when they abandon the cloth, according to Church law. The dispensations can take years, though many priests who decide to leave the church to marry do not wait for the process to be completed.

Alberto Melloni, a professor at the University of Modena who has written several books about the Vatican, said that today’s statement reiterating church tradition came as no surprise, but that the fact that the Vatican held the high-level meeting to discuss the matter “was very serious” and a “symptom of larger unease within the church.”

The renegade prelate is planning a convention of married priests in New York on Dec. 8 to 10, news agencies reported.

Mr. Milingo has rejected his excommunication, and his defiant challenge of the Vatican has raised fears of a possible schism within the church.

“He’s seen as dangerous,” said Sandro Magister, who writes about the Vatican for the newsweekly l’Espresso. Officials at the Vatican are especially concerned, Mr. Magister said, that with his legion of married former priests Milingo was in a position to create a ready-made “church within a church,” that could find especially fertile ground for expansion in Africa.

I posted my comments here to the above article, in which even Sandro Magister is quoted as being worried that Milingo and his minions could form a church within a church. I ended up writing out my own reflections on priestly celibacy, etc., so I have taken it out of this thread thread and put it into REFLECTIONS ON OUR FAITH AND ITS PRACTICES.

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 18/11/2006 23.26]

Pope Benedict XVI meets with German president at Vatican

The Associated Press

Pope Benedict XVI held private talks on Saturday with German President Horst Koehler about the importance of dialogue between religions, international affairs and other issues, the Vatican said.

"The cordial talks permitted, among other things, an exchange of opinions on topics dealing with the international situation, with particular reference to the Middle East," the Vatican said in a statement about the 35-minute conversation.

Koehler later told journalists that he and the pope discussed Benedict's visit to predominantly Muslim Turkey later this month, as well as the controversy over the pontiff's remarks about violence and Islam during a Sept. 12 speech at a German university.

He briefed the pontiff about the current debate in Germany on integration, especially involving German Muslims, Koehler said, because it was important to "win credibility in the dialogue between Islam and Christianity," the Italian news agency Apcom reported.

"We need to make them understand that the country welcomes Muslims, their basic principles, which are welcome in Germany," Koehler was quoted as saying. Both he and the pope agreed that dialogue with Islam was needed, the president said.

"This dialogue hopes to yield positive things, but you need to conduct it in a patient way. You cannot solve everything in one day, but it is the right path," Koehler said.

After the talks, Koehler presented his wife and 15-member entourage to the pontiff, and the group chatted for a few minutes.

As a gift to the pope, the Berlin Philharmonic Quartet will play a concert in the Sala Clementina, an ornate hall in the Apostolic Palace, early Saturday evening. Music is one of Benedict's pastimes.

The pope, who is German, gave the president a medallion in an elegant box.

The president told reporters that he had invited Benedict to make another pilgrimage to his homeland.

"I am happy that the pope said that he will consider my invitation for an official visit in Germany, a state visit," Apcom quoted Koehler as telling reporters in St. Peter's Square. "For now, no date has been set" but "the pope is very happy about the invitation," the president was quoted as saying.

Benedict was last in Germany in early September. He also led Catholic youths in gatherings in Cologne in 2005.

Separately, Benedict met with German bishops and lamented that both the number of priests and the number of faithful attending Sunday Mass had decreased in several dioceses in Germany. The Vatican has been concerned with flagging faith among Catholics in Western Europe.

Benedict urged the bishops to do everything possible to promote and encourage marriage and married couples having children back home.

"For young people, it is becoming difficult to made permanent ties" and later have children together, the pope told the bishops in his speech.

At the Angelus on Sunday, 11/19, the Pope spoke about the contemplative orders and their importance in the life of the Church. A translation of the full text of his message is posted in the AUDIENCE AND ANGELUS TEXTS thread.

Saturday evening, 11/18, the Pope delivered a beautiful, very poetic reflection about music after a concert played in his honor by the Berlin Philharmonia Quartet at the Sala Clementina of the Apostolic Palace. A translation of the full text (delivered in German and Italian) is posted in HOMILIES, DISCOURSES, MESSAGES.

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 20/11/2006 3.28]

AsiaNews has the report in its Italian service but not in the bnglish service as of yet, so here is a quick translation of the first three paragraphs.

"Freedom of religion is not merely the individual right of every person to profess and manifest his own faith, but also a collective freedom for families, groups and the Church itself, " Pope Benedict XVI said today in a speech during the official visit to the Vatican by President Giorgio Napolitano, head of the Italian state.

Therefore, the Pope pointed out, freedom of religion requires that the civil auhtorities :create conditions favorable for the development of religious life, such that citizens are really able to exercise their rights with regard to their religion and fulfill their obligations."

The Pope reiterated what he said in Verona that the Church 'is not, nor does it intend to be, a politial agent." but "it has a profound interestin the good of teh political community" and it is up to Catholic laymen to affirm their principles in society.
....
===============================================================

It's Monday morning, so I don't know how soon I can post a translation of the Pope's address.

Abuse of Minors by Priests:
An Assessment of the “Purification” Underway
They are “heart-rending” crimes, an increasingly severe
and demanding Benedict XVI said to the bishops of Ireland.
A summary of two years of repression: what has been done,
and what is left to do

by Sandro Magister


ROMA, November 20, 2006 – To the Irish bishops gathered before him at the Vatican at the end of October, Benedict XVI clearly said that this is a “time of purification.”

It is a time of purification from the “filth” he denounced in the memorable Via Crucis at the Colosseum on Good Friday two years ago, shortly before being elected pope, a filth made up of the “many heart-rending cases of sexual abuse of minors. These are all the more tragic when the abuser is a cleric."

Pope Joseph Ratzinger is very severe and demanding in this area, more so than his predecessor John Paul II. In the year and a half of his pontificate, he has not hesitated to use the lash even against churchmen held to be untouchable by the previous pope.

Along with the United States, Ireland is the country where the Church has created the greatest scandal. The archbishop of Dublin, Diarmuid Martin, 68, confirmed in an interview with “Avvenire” (2) that Benedict XVI, in receiving the Irish bishops, not only denounced the horror of abuse, but dictated to them “precise indications” on how to clean up – with sanctions that are sometimes more rigid than the ones handed down by civil tribunals.

In Ireland, the bishops have verified that in sixty years, from 1945 to 2004, 105 priests – almost 4 percent of the total – have been implicated in sexual abuse against minors under 18 years old, with around 400 victims. Of those still alive, 8 have been condemned to prison after a penal trial, and another 32 are undergoing civil trials.

Still others have received no judicial sentence because of the impossibility of proving acts too far removed in time. But with these, too, the hierarchy of the Church reacts today by excluding them from pastoral activity. And in any case it asks all the priests targeted by accusations to suspend all of their duties, even before investigations begin.

It can therefore happen that these sanctions temporarily punish persons who later turn out to be innocent: “But unfortunately, experience has obliged us to apply these painful but indispensable provisions,” archbishop Martin affirms. The prevailing policy is that it is better to be too severe than to risk the contrary.

It’s the same in the United States. There, too, it has been verified that the priests who have committed sexual abuse against minors in the past half century are around 4 percent of the total: 4,392 out of 110,000 diocesan and religious priests.

Three fourths of the crimes took place between 1960 and 1984, when the customary practice was simply to transfer the guilty party from one post to another, perhaps after psychotherapy sessions that in reality didn’t change anything.

This irresponsible and indulgent practice, even with the phenomenon in decline, was protracted until very recent times, when in 2002 the scandal exploded in the media and everything was discovered. The bishops of the United States reacted to their own previous weaknesses with a new “zero tolerance” policy. A great number of cases have flooded the civil courts, and exorbitant requests for compensation have fallen upon the dioceses.

Even some bishops have been upended, not only for having covered up abuse, but for having committed it themselves. One of these, Anthony O’Connell of Palm Beach, Florida, made a revealing admission in 2002. He said that in doing these things, he felt the influence of the spirit of the 1970’s, “when the Masters and Johnson report laid down the law, and a climate of sexual transgression reigned.”

In some courts in the United States, it has come to the point of citing the Holy See as an accomplice in the crimes under review. The last request of this sort came last May from a tribunal in Oregon. But until now, they have all been blocked on account of the Holy See’s immunity as a sovereign state.

On February 8, 2005, receiving Condoleezza Rice at the Vatican, then-secretary of state Angelo Sodano asked his counterpart from the United States to intervene in defense of the immunity of the Holy See, which had been called to court by a tribunal in Kentucky. The intervention came.

In Italy, the numbers on sexual abuse committed by priests are less startling than in the United States and Ireland. But there is an increasing severity on the part of the Church hierarchy here, too.

The general secretary of the episcopal conference, Giuseppe Betori, who in 2002 described the phenomenon as “so insignificant as not to merit specific attention,” today promotes the establishment in every diocese of a Meter center, the association founded by Fr. Fortunato Di Noto to combat pedophilia.

Ratzinger as well, when he was prefect of the congregation for the doctrine of the faith, was less insistent than he is today. Offenses against the sixth commandment were the exclusive domain of his congregation, but in a number of cases, even very circumstantiated denunciations were never pursued.

Still in November of 2002, when the scandal in the United States was at its acme, Ratzinger minimized the number of guilty priests: “less than 1 percent,” and he attributed the explosion of the scandal above all to “the desire to discredit the Church.”

But then he changed course. [Teresa's note: Is it not possible he did not have enough documented information - as opposed to anecdotal and general estimates - in 2002 about the extent of the problem? He is neither native, stupid nor dishonest to have said what he said unless he believed it was so - and if the quote is right, he said "number of guilty priests" for the 'less than 1%], not the number of accused!]

It was the autumn of 2004, and Ratzinger ordered the promoter of justice at the congregation for the doctrine of the faith, Charles J. Scicluna of Malta, to retrieve from the files all the cases concerning the sixth commandment. [By this time, more than enough had become documented in the USA of flagrant toleration by bishops of offending priests, so it makes sense that he did this at this time. And/or he must have received by then convincing corroborative information about high-profile people like Maciel and Burelli.]

The order was: “Every case must take its normal course.” In other words: no one could be held as untouchable anymore, not even those protected by the then extremely powerful cardinal Sodano, and not even the favorites of the reigning pope, John Paul II.

And so among the other investigations were begun, or restarted, the investigations against the two founders of religious orders with strong support in the curia: Gino Burresi, Italian, founder of the Servants of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, and Marcial Maciel Degollado of Mexico, founder of the Legionaries of Christ, both accused of sexual abuse against their young seminarians and followers, and of extremely serious violations of the sacrament of confession.

The death John Paul II, and the following election of Ratzinger as pope, did not bring to a halt the investigations ordained by the latter. On the contrary.

In May of 2005, the first act signed by the new prefect of the congregation of the faith, William J. Levada of the United States, was precisely the condemnation of Gino Burresi, the first of the two founders of religious orders cited above. The condemnation had the approval of Benedict XVI “in specific form,” which does not admit appeal.

The sentence on the founder of the Legionaries of Christ required more time, and had to overcome more resistance. When L’espresso, on May 20, 2005, gave a detailed report of the interrogations of dozens of accusing testimonies, the Vatican secretariat of state responded by asserting that “there is no canonical proceeding underway in regard to Fr. Maciel, nor is one foreseen for the future.”

What was really at the heart of the apparent denial was that the congregation for the doctrine of the faith was sparing Maciel from a canonical process for reasons of health and age – he was 86. But the condemnation came relentlessly one year later: the revocation of all public ministry, and “a retired life of prayer and penance.”

Shortly thereafter, Benedict XVI dismissed the cardinal secretary of state, Sodano.

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 20/11/2006 15.17]

The Passion of the Pope

With his blunt talk on Islam, Benedict XVI is altering the debate between the Muslim world and the West. On the eve of his visit to Turkey, TIME looks at the roots of the Pope's views--and how they may define his place in history

By DAVID VAN BIEMA, JEFF ISRAELY/ROME
Sunday, Nov. 19, 2006
TIME Magazine
Cover story




For the traveling Pontiff, it was not a laid-back Turkish holiday. The citizens of the proud, predominantly Muslim nation had no love of Popes. To the East, the Iranian government was galvanizing anti-Western feeling. The news reported that an escaped killer was on the loose, threatening to assassinate the Pontiff when he arrived. Yet the Holy Father was undaunted. "Love is stronger than danger," he said. "I am in the hands of God." He fared forward--to Ankara, to Istanbul--and preached the commonality of the world's great faiths. He enjoined both Christians and Muslims to "seek ties of friendship with other believers who invoke the name of a single God." He did not leave covered with garlands, but he set a groundwork for what would be years of rapprochement between the Holy See and Islam. He was a uniter, not a divider.

That was 1979 and Pope John Paul II. But when Benedict XVI travels to Turkey next week on his first visit to a Muslim country since becoming Pope last year, he is unlikely to cloak himself in a downy banner of brotherhood, the way his predecessor did 27 years ago. Instead, Benedict, 79, will arrive carrying a different reputation: that of a hard-knuckle intellect with a taste for blunt talk and interreligious confrontation. Just 19 months into his tenure, the Pope has become as much a moral lightning rod as a theologian; suddenly, when he speaks, the whole world listens. And so what takes place over four days in three Turkish cities has the potential to define his papacy--and a good deal more.

Few people saw this coming. Nobody truly expected Benedict to be a mere caretaker Pope--his sometimes ferocious 24-year tenure as the Vatican's theological enforcer and John Paul's right hand suggested anything but passivity. But this same familiarity argued against surprises. The new Pontiff was expected to sustain John Paul's conservative line on morality and church discipline and focus most of his energies on trimming the Vatican bureaucracy and battling Western culture's "moral relativism." Although acknowledged as a brilliant conservative theologian, Benedict lacked the open-armed charisma of his predecessor. Moreover, what had initially propelled John Paul to the center of the world stage was his challenge to communism and its subsequent fall, a huge geopolitical event that the Pope helped precipitate with two exhilarating visits to his beloved Polish homeland. By contrast, what could Benedict do? Liberate Bavaria?

Well, not quite. But this year he has emerged as a far more compelling and complex figure than anyone had imagined. And much of that has to do with his willingness to confront what some people feel is today's equivalent of the communist scourge--the threat of Islamic violence. The topic is extraordinarily fraught. There are, after all, a billion or so nonviolent Muslims on the globe, the Roman Catholic Church's own record in the religious-mayhem department is hardly pristine, and even the most naive of observers understands that the Vicar of Christ might harbor an institutional prejudice against one of Christianity's main global competitors. But by speaking out last September in Regensburg, Germany, about the possible intrinsic connection between Islam and violence, the Pontiff suddenly became a lot more interesting. Even when Islamic extremists destroyed several churches and murdered a nun in Somalia, Benedict refused to retract the essence of his remarks. In one imperfect but powerful stroke, he departed from his predecessor's largely benign approach to Islam and discovered an issue that might attract even the most religiously jaded. In doing so, he managed (for better or worse) to reanimate the clash-of-civilizations discussion by focusing scrutiny on the core question of whether Islam, as a religion, sanctions violence. He was hailed by cultural conservatives worldwide. Says Helen Hull Hitchcock, a St. Louis, Mo., lay leader who heads the conservative Catholic organization Women for Faith and Family: "He has said what needed to be said."

But Benedict now finds himself in an unfamiliar position as he embarks on the most important mission of his papacy. Having thrust himself to the center of the global debate and earned the vilification of the Muslim street, he must weigh hard options. Does he seize his new platform, insisting that another great faith has potentially deadly flaws and daring it to discuss them, while exhorting Western audiences to be morally armed? Or does he back away from further confrontation in the hope of tamping down the rage his words have already provoked? Those who know him say he was clearly shocked and appalled by the violent reaction to the Germany speech. Yet it seems unlikely that he will completely drop the topic and the megaphone he has discovered he is holding. "The Pope has the intention to say what he thinks," says a high-ranking Vatican diplomat. "He may adjust his tone, but his direction won't change."

APPOINTMENT IN ANKARA

If the test of a new act is to see how well it plays in a tough room, Benedict has certainly booked himself into a doozy. In the racial memory of Western Europe, the Turks were the face of militant Islam, besieging Vienna in 1529 and 1683 and for centuries thereafter representing a kind of stock bogeyman. In 2002, after nearly a century of determinedly secularist rule, the country elected a moderate Islamist party. For many in the West, that makes Turkey simultaneously a symbol of hope (of moderation) and fear (of Islamism).

The Pope's original invitation came in 2005, from the Ecumenical Patriarch of the Eastern Orthodox Church, which represents a nervous 0.01% of the country's population. The Turkish government, miffed that as a Cardinal, Joseph Ratzinger had opposed Turkey's urgent bid to join the European Union, finally issued its own belated offer for 2006. But even now, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has discovered a previous engagement that will take him out of the country while Benedict is in it. Although modest, sales of a Turkish novel subtitled Who Will Kill the Pope in Istanbul? (the book fingers everyone but Islamists) have increased as his trip approaches. The country is expected to place about 22,000 policemen on the streets of Istanbul while he is there. "This is a very high-risk visit," says Cengiz Aktar, a Turkish political scientist. "There is a vocal nationalist movement here, and there is the Pope, a man who likes to play with fire."

Actually, Benedict will probably try to stay away from matches during his successive stops in Ankara, Ephesus and Istanbul. Speculation about what the Pope will say and do on this visit has consumed Rome for weeks. Papal watchers say Benedict cannot out-Regensburg himself, but gauzy talk about the compatibility of Christianity and Islam isn't likely either. Over the course of his career, Benedict has been averse to reciting multifaith platitudes, an aversion that has sharpened as he has focused on Islam. And that's what could make his coming encounter with the Muslim world, says David Gibson, author of The Rule of Benedict, either "a step toward religious harmony or toward holy war."

A BRIGHT-LINES KIND OF GUY

In 1986, Pope John Paul convened a remarkable multifaith summit in the medieval Italian town of Assisi. Muslims and Sikhs, Zoroastrians and the Archbishop of Canterbury, among others, convened to celebrate their (distinct) spiritualities and pray for peace. It was a signature John Paul moment, but not everybody caught the vibe. "It was a disaster," sniffs an observer. "People were praying together, and nobody had any idea what they were praying to." The witness, whose view undoubtedly reflected that of his boss, was an aide to Cardinal Ratzinger.

Unlike John Paul, who had a big-tent approach, Ratzinger has always favored bright theological lines and correspondingly high walls between creeds he regards as unequally meritorious. His long-standing habit is to correct any aide who calls a religion other than Christianity or Judaism a "faith." Prior to his papacy, the culmination of this philosophy was his office's 1999 Vatican document Dominus Jesus, which described non-Catholics as being in a "gravely deficient situation" regarding salvation. The fact that this offended some of the deficient parties did not particularly bother him. Notes the same assistant: "To understand each other ... you have to talk about what divides."

That approach includes Islam. In Ratzinger's 1996 interview book Salt of the Earth (with Peter Seewald), he noted that "we must recognize that Islam is not a uniform thing. No one can speak for [it] as a whole. There is a noble Islam, embodied, for example, by the King of Morocco, and there is also the extremist, terrorist Islam, which, again, one must not identify with Islam as a whole, which would do it an injustice." This sophisticated understanding, however, did not keep Ratzinger from slapping down a bishop who wanted to invite peaceable Muslims to a papal ceremony in Fatima, Portugal, or, in 2004, from objecting to Turkish E.U. entry on grounds that it has always been "in permanent contrast to Europe," a contrast his other writings made clear had much to do with religion.

Islam played a particular role--as both a threat and a model--in the drama that probably lies closest to Benedict's heart: the secularization of Christian Europe. In the same 1996 book, he wrote that "the Islamic soul reawakened" in reaction to the erosion of the West's moral stature during the 1960s. Ratzinger paraphrased that soul's new song: "We know who we are; our religion is holding its ground; you don't have one any longer. We have a moral message that has existed without interruption since the prophets, and we will tell the world how to live it, where the Christians certainly can't."

After Sept. 11, Ratzinger's attitude toward Islam seems to have hardened. According to Gibson, the Cardinals in the conclave that elected Ratzinger made it clear that they expected a tougher dialogue with the other faith. After the London subway bombings in July 2005, the new Pope responded to the question of whether Islam was a "religion of peace"--as George W. Bush, among others, has always stressed-- by saying, "Certainly there are also elements that can favor peace." When he met with moderate German Muslims in the city of Cologne that August, Benedict delivered a fairly blunt warning that "those who instigate and plan these attacks evidently wish to poison our relations." In Rome, he removed Archbishop Michael Fitzgerald, a relatively dovish Islam expert, as head of the Vatican's office on interreligious dialogue and replaced an ongoing study of Christian violence during the Crusades with one on Islamic violence today. And he has stepped up the Vatican's insistence on reciprocity--demanding the same rights for Christians in Muslim-majority countries that Muslims enjoy in the West.

All of this led observers to expect him to eventually make a major statement about Islam, although most assumed that it wouldn't stray too far from John Paul's fraternal tone. Nobody anticipated what happened in southern Germany.

THE POINT OF NO RETURN

On Sept. 12, 2006, the day after the world had marked the fifth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, Benedict threw himself into the maelstrom. The unlikely venue was his old teaching grounds, the University of Regensburg. His vehicle was a talk about reason as part of Christianity's very essence. His nominal target was his usual suspect, the secular West, which he said had committed the tragic error of discarding Christianity as reason-free. But this time he had an additional villain in his sights: Islam, which he said actually did undervalue rationality and which he strongly suggested was consequently more inclined to violence.

To show that Islam sees God as so transcendent that reason is extraneous, Benedict cited an 11th century Muslim sage named Ibn Hazm. To establish the connection between this position and violence, he quoted a 15th century Christian Byzantine Emperor (and head of the Byzantine, or Eastern, Church) named Manuel II Paleologus. Paleologus criticized Muslims for "spreading [their faith] by the sword," both because "God is not pleased by blood" and because true conversion depended on reason. "Show me just what the Muhammad brought that was new," Paleologus said, in a passage quoted by Benedict, "and there you will find things only evil and inhuman."

It remains unclear whether Benedict was deliberately trying to raise the temperature. Many analysts, especially in Rome, think he knew exactly what he was saying and regard the Islamic section of the 35-min. speech as a brave and eloquent warning of Islam's inherent violence and of a faithless West's inability to offer moral response. Yet Benedict's argument was slapdash and flawed. His sage, Ibn Hazm, turned out to have belonged to a school with no current adherents, and although reason's primacy is debated in Islam, it is very much part of the culture that developed algebra. Paleologus' forced-conversion accusation misrepresents the sweep of Muslim history, since more often than not, Islam has left religious groups in conquered territory intact, if hobbled. And assuming that a punctilious scholar like Benedict really wanted to engage on Islam and violence, why do it through the idiosyncratic lens of an embattled king in the 1400s who made his name partly for his efforts at drumming up enthusiasm for a new Crusade?

The reaction to the speech was intense. Small bands of Muslim thugs burned Benedict in effigy, attacked the churches in the Middle East and, on Sept. 17, murdered the nun in Somalia. Over the course of a month, Benedict issued a series of partial apologies and corrections unprecedented in the papacy. He expressed regret to those offended, summoned a group of Muslim notables to make the point personally and disowned the "evil and inhuman" slur on Muhammad as Manuel's sentiment but not his own. He even issued a second version of the speech to reflect those sentiments.

But he never retracted his more basic association of Islam with unreason and violence. Indeed, if he had, it would have caused considerable confusion--if only because the behavior of the extremists seemed, at least to some, to prove his point. No editorialist could express frustration with him for initiating the row without condemning the subsequent carnage--and a good many decided his only fault was in speaking truth. Says a high-ranking Western diplomat in Rome: "It was time to let the rabbit out of the can, and he did. I admire his courage. Part of the Koran lends itself to being shanghaied by terrorists, and he can do what politicians can't." In late October, Benedict received a different kind of validation in an open "Your Holiness" letter from 38 of the best-known names in Islamic theology. The missive politely eviscerated his Regensburg speech but went on to "applaud" the Pope's "efforts to oppose the dominance of positivism and materialism in human life" and expressed a desire for "frank and sincere dialogue." At a time when the credibility of Western political leaders in the Muslim world has sunk to new depths, the letter treated Benedict as a spokesman for the West.

Says a Vatican insider with a shrug: "Everyone's asking, Did the Pope make a mistake? Was it intentional? It doesn't really matter at this point." Whether Benedict had actually intended Regensburg to be the catalyst, he had become a player.

THE PAPAL MEGAPHONE

After Regensburg, the mainstream Italian daily La Stampa ran the headline THE POPE AND BUSH ALLIED AGAINST TERROR. The association with the Iraq war and U.S. interrogation methods must have horrified the Pontiff, if only because it could undermine the church's honest-broker role in regional conflicts. "It's easy to say, 'Go Benedict! Hit the Muslims!'" says Gibson. "But that's not who he is. He is not a Crusader." Shortly before Regensburg, Benedict had endured Western criticism for repeatedly demanding a cease-fire after Israel's invasion of Lebanon. Angelo Cardinal Scola, a protégé of the Pope's who edits Oasis, a Church quarterly on dialogue with Islam, says the fact "that radical Islam can turn to violence does not mean we must respond with a crusade."

The Pope's pursuit of his newfound calling as Islamic interlocutor will be tricky, theologically and politically. Unlike the holy books of Judaism and Christianity, the Koran and Hadiths contain verses precisely regulating the conduct of war and exhorting Muslims to wage battle against various enemies. The bellicosity of some Koranic passages owes much to the fact that they were written at a time when Muslims were engaged in almost constant warfare to defend their religion. But when suicide bombers today go to their fates with the Koran's verses on their lips, it invites questions about Islam's credentials as a religion that is willing to police its own claims of peace and tolerance. As conservative Catholic scholar Michael Novak points out, the Vatican's pacifism gives Benedict unmatched moral standing to press this point. "Being against war, he can say tougher things ... than any President or Prime Minister can. His role is to represent Western civilization."

Perhaps so, but then he might have to represent its past as well, including all the historical violence done in Jesus' name (despite the Gospels' pacifism). Discussion of Christianity's dark hours has not been his penchant. Moreover, the position Benedict took in Regensburg--that Islam and violence are indeed essentially connected--worked as an opening gambit but doesn't leave much room for either side to maneuver. People asked to flatly renounce their Holy Writ generally don't. And Benedict has little give--because first, he seldom says anything he is not prepared to defend to the bitter end and second, if he retreats now, he risks being accused of the same moral relativism that he rails against.

Still, many Catholics are rooting for him to come up with a way to engage without enraging. The widely read Catholic blogger Amy Welborn says, "I think there's a pretty widespread fed-up-ness with Islamic sensitivity. I agree that elements of Islam that either explicitly espouse violence or are less than aggressive in combatting it need to be challenged and nudged, [just as] I would like to see the Pope continue to challenge and nudge people of all different religions--Christian and non-Christian--to look at the suffering of people." She thinks that, given the heat he's taking in parts of the Islamic world, his willingness to go through with his Turkish trip is "so brave."

But what should he do while he's there? John Esposito, a respected Islam scholar at Georgetown University, says the Pope can't confine himself to meetings with Christian leaders. "He must address the Muslim majority." Seyyed Hossein Nasr, a professor at George Washington University and one of the 38 signatories to the October letter to Benedict, says the Pope should deliver an "earnest expression of commonality"--even if it's only the widely accepted observation that Judaism, Christianity and Islam all claim descent from the biblical figure of Abraham. Father Richard McBrien, a theologian at Notre Dame, says that "if he doesn't bring up the issue of reciprocal respect for Christian minorities, he's not doing his job," but that he should avoid an absolutist, now-or-never stance.

High-ranking Vatican sources say Benedict will avoid repeating the Islam-and-violence trope in any form as blatant as Regensburg's. Instead, suggests Father Thomas Reese, a senior research fellow at the Woodstock Theological Center in Washington, an independent nonprofit institute at Georgetown, the Pope may take a less broad-brush approach to the issue by repeating his sentiment from Cologne: "He could say, 'You, like me, are concerned about terrorism' and he would like to see Islamic clerics be more up front condemning it." Once over the hump, happier topics should be easy to find. "Quite frankly," says Reese, "the Pope and the Muslims are on the same page on abortion. They [agree on] relativism and consumerism, hedonistic culture, sex and violence, Palestinian rights." Conceivably, like John Paul's first journey back to communist Poland, Benedict's simple presence in this Muslim land may speak louder than words.

Whether this is the way Benedict will choose to proceed remains to be seen. But whatever he does, bold or subtle, the explosiveness of the current relationship between Islam and the West will require him to become a diplomat as much as a scholar. As he strives to assume that role, holding out an olive branch to other religions while fiercely defending his own, the Pope may want to consider the story of a much earlier walker of the Catholic-Islamic tightrope. In the 13th century, during the middle of the Fifth Crusade, St. Francis of Assisi briefly departed Italy and journeyed to the Holy Land to evangelize to the Muslims. According to Christian traditions, he preached the gospel to the Sultan, only to be told that Muslims were as convinced of the truth of Islam as Francis was of Christianity. At that, Francis proposed that he and a Muslim walk through a fire to test whose faith was stronger. The Sultan said he didn't know whether he could locate a volunteer. Francis said he would walk through the fire by himself. Impressed with Francis' devotion, the Sultan, while maintaining his own faith, agreed to a truce between the two warring sides.

Francis' precise methods may be a bit outdated. But 800 years later, his mixture of flexibility and tenacity could be a useful paradigm for a frank and sincere dialogue in an ever turbulent religious world.

With reporting by With reporting by Jeff Chu/ New York, Andrew Purvis/ Berlin, Pelin Turgut/ Ankara with other bureaus

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 21/11/2006 4.06]

The official visit of the Italian head of state, President Giorgio Napolitano, to Pope Benedict XVI yesterday dominated the front pages of the Italian newspapers today.

Avvenire, the newspaper of the Italian Bishops Conference, devoted 4 inside pages to it as well (Shown here - front page and pp. 4-5).



Pending translation of a couple of articles that are most representative, here is the AP report as it appears
in today's edition of the International Herald Tribune.


Italian head of state
(a former Communist politician)
meets with pope at Vatican


VATICAN CITY, Nov. 20 (AP): Italy's newly elected president, Giorgio Napolitano, praised Pope Benedict XVI on Monday for his appeals for the end of violence in the Middle East, as the two men met at the Vatican.

Napolitano — a former Communist leader elected to the presidency in May — spent 2 1/2 hours at the Vatican, much of the time in pomp-filled ceremony, including a procession from St. Peter's Basilica into St. Peter's Square, as part of the traditional courtesy call that new Italian heads of state pay on pontiffs.

For decades, the Vatican has had a significant influence on many Italian politicians on both the left and the right. Several parties in both Premier Romano Prodi's center-left coalition and in the opposition led by conservative media mogul Silvio Berlusconi either have Christian Democrat roots or closely follow the Vatican's pronouncements on social issues.

In his speech to the pontiff, Napolitano, who served in the early 1990s as speaker of Parliament's lower house, praised Benedict for "the messages you constantly deliver dealing with the problems of today's world" and the human condition.

"We are touched and comforted by your messages of peace, resolute and clear appeals," including those denouncing "the violence that still tears apart the near and dear land of the Middle East," the president told the pope.

While 20th-century accords between the Holy See and Italy sanctioned the separation of church and state, Napolitano said politics "should never shed itself of its ideals and spiritual component, of its ethical side."

Benedict said that, while politics and the Church were independent of each other, both "are at the service of the personal and social" aspects of people. He said lay faithful, "acting with full responsibility and making use of their right to participate in public life on par with all citizens," were working for a more just society.

Their challenges, Benedict said, included working to "safeguard human life in all its stages, from conception to natural death, to promote the family, founded on marriage."

Vatican teaching holds that defense of life from conception to natural death rules out abortion and euthanasia. Benedict has also been waging a campaign against any moves by governments to legalize unions other than those between married men and women.


Here is a translation of Corriere della Sera's editorial today on the meeting between Pope Benedict and President Napolitano, which notes the ex-Communist's acknowledgment of the need for Church and State to work together including in the area of supporting the family, the custody of life and religious education - about which, many times int he recent past, the Pope has described the Church position to be non-negotiable..

The spirit of the nation
By Massimo Franco


The true attempt at national unity probably took place yesterday in the first meeting between Giorgio Napolitano and Benedict XVI: between the ex-Communist who is now President of the Republic of Italy and the guardian of Catholic orthodoxy who succeeded John Paul II.

They appeared to agree - without regard for political alignments - on the nagging 'pre-political question' of how to "strengthen national unity and the cohesion of Italian society."

In stating this challenge, Napolitano asked for the Pope's help: an action which probably only a non-Catholic head of state could carry out without being accused of 'clericalism.'

Echoes of a not so distant past come to mind: Palmiro Togliatti, head of the Italian Communist party, who supported Article 7 on relations between Church and State [presumably providing for absolute separation] at the Constituent Assembly more than 60 years ago.

Yesterday's meeting however, even if it lasted less than half an hour, appeared to be very much dominated by the present: by a situation of such seriousness and uncertainty which is forcing the relationship between Italy and the Holy See to confront not a crisis of government but of the social and cultural system.

The apprehension indicated by Napolitano's words goes far beyond the possible prospects for the Prodi colation government. It has to do with the quality of the relationships that Italy has today at every level.

His appeal for policies that 'cannot be stripped of an ideal and spiritual component;" a 'common educative mission' wherever the fabric of social cohesion 'has been weakened'; the hope of arriving at 'valid, well thought out and non-partisan solutions for the complex problems of supporting the family, the custody of life and the freedom of education" - these were the priorities that the Italian chief of state identified as urgent, if not real emergencies.

But he seemed to take into account that to face those challenges, the Pope and The Church with their "special sensibility and solicitude" would be obligatory interlocutors.

It was a secular speech but devoid of any secularizing effort such as those that some politicians of the left often do.

But all this without an attitude of suzerainty, either. No one would think of calling Napolitano a late-blooming Papist. But compared to the recent past, this was the new thing: the absence of any statement emphasizing the autonomy of either side. The President of the Republic and the Pontiff appear to take that for granted, with all its rich potential as well as its shadows.

There is no state theology to oppose to Catholic theology. Napolitano limited himself to referring to the 'secular principle' spelled out by the Italian Constitution.

Benedict XVI replied in turn, evoking the common mission of Church and State "although they are fully distinct" and giving assurances that the Holy See "is not and does not intend to be a political agent."

Behind these words are years of confrontation and polemic over the so-called Catholic question in Italy following the demise of the Christian Democratic Party towards the end of the last century. These years have been marked by parliamentary battles and referenda. But in the end, Church and state must work together.

It is possible that the exchange of diplomatic courtesies resulted in emphasizing the natural distance between the two protagonists. But their agreement on international politics is not mere gallantry.

The Vatican expressed its thanks to a Napolitano who has been criticized by the extreme left for his support of Italian missions abroad.

Secretary of State Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone said, in welcoming him, that he 'has spurred Italy to actively promote peace in various parts of the world," That adverb 'actively' sounded like a criticism of pacifist ideology that has for some time now been eyed suspiciously if not with disdain.

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 21/11/2006 22.43]

Announcement in the NCR today:

John Allen will be on vacation Nov. 20-25. When Allen returns, he will be in Rome and then on the papal plane for Benedict XVI's Nov. 28-Dec. 1 trip to Turkey.

Here's the brief announcement from the Vatican Press Offcie today:


The Holy Father Benedict XVI has finished writing the first part of a book entitled Gesù di Nazareth - Dal Battesimo nel Giordano alla Trasfigurazione [Jesus of Nazareth: From the Baptism in the Jordan to the Transfiguration] - and has sent in on to the Vatican Publishing House for printing.

The announcement doesn't say what language it will come out in, but since it does not give a German title, the first version might well come out in Italian.

Did I say I thought it would be out for Christmas? It seems we have to wait longer.

More details from the online Corriere della Sera, shared with us by Emma:

Apparently, the first volume will be published by Rizzoli in the spring. The news item describes it as "a sort of Summa Theologica of the life of Christ" - but Joseph Ratzinger appears to be more modest about what it is.

In the Preface, the Pope writes: "This book is absolutely not a magisterial statement, only the expression of my personal research into the 'face of Jesus.' So, everyone is free to contradict me (about it)."

Writing as Joseph Ratzinger, the Pope explains that his work should not be seen as binding or part of the Magisterium. "I only ask of the reader his or her sympathy, without which there may be no understanding."

"I consider it a great privilege," said Giulio Lattanzi, " to publish Joseph Ratzinger's first book as Pope. I thank our friends at the Vatican Publishing House. I recognize all the responsibility that comes with this and we well do our best to
live up to it as best we can."
===============================================================

Even though we've known about this book for over a year now, isn't it thrilling just to think that a Pope, this Pope, has written a 'life of Jesus'? Can anyone think offhand what the last major Jesus biography was? The only one I've read is Ernest Renan's "La Vie de Jesus" which I read at 14, but which looks at Jesus as a man, not as God incarnate.

P.S. I am posting here the AP report as published in the International Herald Tribune for today, because the headline given to it is typically inaccurate. The announcement was not that the Pope has written the book, but that it is now ready for publication. The Pope himself has talked about the book since 2003 as our Forum readers will know from items that we have posted over the past year.

Vatican announces Pope Benedict XVI
has written book on Jesus Christ
VATICAN CITY: Pope Benedict XVI has completed his first book as pontiff, a work about Jesus Christ that he says is purely personal and not at all infallible, an Italian publishing house said Tuesday.

Announcements by the Vatican and the Rizzoli publishing house said the book "Jesus of Nazareth" will be released in the spring and that Rizzoli will negotiate worldwide sales.

Benedict, a theologian by training, has been a prolific author since his years as a professor in his native Germany.

The book, meant for general Catholic readers, will be the first of two volumes on Christ.

In a preface released by the Italian publisher, Benedict writes that the book is "absolutely not an act" of church authority and teaching but "an expression of my personal research into the 'face of the Lord.'"

"Therefore, everyone is free to contradict me," Benedict said.

Benedict's predecessor Pope John Paul II also was a prolific writer, whose works included the international best-seller "Crossing the Threshold of Hope."

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

P.P.S. I asked earlier what was the last major biography of Jesus anyone recalls, and I am hitting my head against the wall for momentarily forgetting something that I did read a few years earlier than I read Renan's book, because how could I forget Fulton Sheen's LIFE OF CHRIST? And somehow, the paperback edition I read - the book was originally published in the early 50s so even in the Philippines it became available in paperback several years later - was subtitled 'The Greatest Story Ever Told' long before the film of that name came out.

It is one of several Sheen books I read as a girl between the age of 10-15 thereabouts, thanks to an aunt who bought them. There were quite a few of the Life is Worth Living series and some like Seven Last Words and Seven Virtues. As a child, I could appreciate the simple beauty of how he expressed himself, and his down-to-earth approach to the daily challenges of living as a Christian, so unlike much of the preaching one had grown up listening to. I believe Bishop Sheen was the first and for a long time the only 'religious' writing I read...So recent reports about the fact that he is a candidate for beatification have made me very happy.

Anyway, back to LIFE OF CHRIST. I cannot remember that it taught me anything essential I had not already been taught about Christ, and I remember no specifics, except that it read very easily adn very grippingly. But I think I remember the dramatic way he began the book. Something to the effect that Jesus was the only man ever born who caused history to be divided into a period before him and after him. That was a pretty dramatic statement to catch anyone's attention because of course, we have all taken B.C. and A.D. for granted. For sure, I am going to want to reread it.

Other things I have verified: Renan wrote 'La Vie de Jesus' in 1863. The next big Jesus book was Albert Schweitzer's 'Quest of the Historical Jesus' half a century later (1906), which was apparently a survey of the historical reconstructions that had been attempted of Jesus up to that time.

Cardinal Ratzinger refers to the Schweitzer book in a passage from a book on Easter, La Cammina Pasquale (The Easter Journey), which Discipula cites in the main forum for anticipating the cardinal's Jesus project, and where he explains what he means by 'sympathy' in the context of what he asks the reader in the preface to the new book. Discipula's beautifully informative and reflective post deserves a translation and a separate treatment, so I will probably post it later in the BOOKS BY AND ABOUT BENEDICT thread.

So, quite apart from Bishop Sheen's book, which was a popular biography rather than a scholarly one, the only two other significant Jesus biographies translated to English in the 20th century appear to have been one by Rudolf Bultmann, a German theologian about whom Ratzi has had something to say in the past, and one on Jesus as a Jew - both of them scholarly biographies. (If anyone knows of other titles that should be in this short list, please share the info with us.]

Joseph Ratzinger's book will therefore be truly a milestone in the Jesus bibliography, not only per se, but because he is very likely the only Pope to have undertaken such a task (even if he is publishing it in his persona as Joseph Ratzinger).

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 23/11/2006 2.38]

ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY'S OFFICIAL VISIT TO THE POPE

VATICAN CITY, NOV 21, 2006 (VIS) - The primate of the Anglican Communion, Archbishop Rowan Williams of Canterbury, England, will make an official visit to the Pope from November 21 to 26, according to a communique released by the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity.

Archbishop Williams, who will be accompanied by his wife and son, will head an eight-strong delegation. The visit is taking place 40 years after the meeting between Pope Paul VI and Archbishop Michael Ramsey - from March 22 to 24, 1966 - and aims "to express the importance the Anglican Communion attributes to relations with the Catholic Church and to the theological dialogue that began with the creation, announced during Paul VI's meeting with Archbishop Ramsey, of the Anglican - Roman Catholic International Commission (ARCIC)."

The central moment of the Archbishop of Canterbury's visit will be his private meeting with the Holy Father on Thursday November 23. After that meeting, the Pope and the archbishop will each deliver an address, and a joint declaration will be signed in the presence of the members of the Anglican delegation and of the Catholic representatives who accompanied the archbishop to Rome, headed by Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, archbishop of Westminster.

After the audience, Benedict XVI and Archbishop Williams, will go to the Vatican's "Redemptoris Mater" Chapel where they will pray together.

On November 22, the Anglican archbishop and Cardinal Walter Kasper, prefect of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, will visit the Sistine Chapel where they will pray together and recollect the meeting there 40 years earlier between Paul VI and Archbishop Michael Ramsey.

On November 24, the Roman church of Santa Maria sopra Minerva will be the setting for an ecumenical celebration of Vespers.

During the course of the visit, Archbishop Williams and Cardinal Kasper will examine the current state of Catholic-Anglican relations, the planning and content of a new cycle of dialogue in the ARCIC following its most recent publication "Mary, Grace and Hope in Christ" in May 2005, the work of the International Anglican - Roman Commission for Unity and Mission (IARCCUM) established in 2000, and the ecumenical situation in general."

The visit will also serve as an opportunity to continue the informal talks, an annual initiative for the giving and receiving of information, coordination of initiatives, and dialogue and exchange.

The archbishop's visit also coincides with the 40th anniversary of the foundation of Rome's Anglican Center, which undertakes various initiatives to favor reciprocal understanding among Catholics and Anglicans. The current director of the Anglican Center is Bishop John Flack, representative of the Anglican communion to the Holy See.

On the afternoon of Sunday, November 26, prior to his departure, Archbishop Williams will preside at an Anglican liturgy in the Basilica of Santa Sabina on Rome's Aventine Hill.

[More detail on Papa's new book.]


Pope's scholarly book on Jesus scheduled for March release

By Cindy Wooden
Catholic News Service

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- Pope Benedict XVI has completed the first volume of a major scholarly and spiritual book on Jesus of Nazareth, a work he began several years before being elected pope.

"Jesus of Nazareth: From the Baptism in the Jordan to the Transfiguration" is scheduled for a March release in Italian by the Rizzoli publishing house and in German by Herder Verlag.

Announcing the publication Nov. 21, Rizzoli and the Vatican gave reporters copies of the book's preface and a portion of its introduction.

In the preface, signed "Joseph Ratzinger -- Benedict XVI," the pope wrote that for decades he had noticed a growing scholarly distinction between the "historical Jesus" and the "Christ of faith," a distinction that many Christians now accept as accurate.

But, he wrote, if the human Jesus was totally different from the Jesus depicted in the Gospels and proclaimed by the church, what does it mean to have faith in him?

"I trust the Gospels," the pope wrote.

And while he said he relied on modern scholarly biblical criticism and historical research, "I wanted to attempt to present the Jesus of the Gospels as the true Jesus, as the 'historic Jesus' in the true sense of the expression."

"Only if something extraordinary happened, if the figure and words of Jesus radically exceeded all the hopes and expectations of his age, can his crucifixion and his effectiveness be explained," the pope wrote.

Pope Benedict explained that he began the book during his 2003 summer vacation, giving the final form to the first four chapters in the summer of 2004.

"After my election to the episcopal see of Rome, I used all of my free moments to work on it," he wrote. "Because I do not know how much time and how much strength I will still be given, I have decided to publish the first 10 chapters" as Volume One of "Jesus of Nazareth."

In a Nov. 21 statement, Jesuit Father Federico Lombardi, director of the Vatican press office, said, "The pope says clearly, with his usual simplicity and humility, that this is not a 'magisterial act,' but a fruit of his personal research and, as such, can be freely discussed and critiqued.

"It is not a long encyclical on Jesus, but a personal presentation of the figure of Jesus by the theologian Joseph Ratzinger," who was elected pope after beginning the work, Father Lombardi said.

"At the same time," the Jesuit said, "it is very significant that he, who was elected bishop of Rome and has the task of supporting the faith of his brothers and sisters, felt so strongly called to give us a new presentation of the figure of Jesus."

The Vatican publishing house, which holds the rights to all the pope's written works, announced Nov. 21 that the pope had handed in the manuscript and that the Vatican had turned to Rizzoli to translate the work, find publishers for it around the world and handle the marketing.

A spokesman for Rizzoli said that as of Nov. 21 the company was prepared to announce only the publication in Italian and German.

Sandro Magister beat everyone to posting the preface written by the Pope for his new book, although it appears that the publishers, Rizzoli, distributed a copy of the Preface to everyone earlier today when the announcement was made.

As his translator has not yet come out with the English version, here is my translation:

'The road I took
in interpreting the figure of Jesus
in the New Testament...'
Preface to
'Jesus of Nazareth.
From Baptism in the Jordan to the Transfiguration,' Rizzoli, 2007.
By Joseph Ratzinger

I arrived at this book on Jesus, whose first part I am presenting to the public at this time, after a long interior journey.

During my youth - in the 1930s and 1940s, a whole series of exciting books on Jesus were published. I remember a few of the authors' names: Karl Adam, Romano Guardini, Franz Michel Willam, Giovanni Papini, Jean-Daniel Rops.

In all these books, the portrait of Jesus was drawn on the basis of the Gospels: how He lived on earth and how, although he was completely human, he brought God to man, God with whom, as the Son, he was One and the Same.

And thus through the man Jesus, God became visible, and in this God one could see the image of the just man.

But starting with the 1950s, things changed. The tug of war between a 'historical Jesus' and "Jesus of the faith' became ever more wide - to the point of 'losing sight of each other'.

But what significance could there be in faith in Jesus Christ, Jesus as the Son of the living God, if Jesus the man was so different from what the evangelists had portrayed and how the Church proclaims Him to be on the basis of the Gospels?

The progress of historical-critical research led to ever more subtle distinctions among the different layers of tradition. Behind those layers, the figure of Jesus, on which the faith rests, became ever more indistinct, took on ever less definite contours.

At the same time, the reconstructions of the Jesus who should be sought behind the traditions of the Evangelists and their sources, became ever more contradictory: from the revolutionary enemy of the Romans who opposed constituted authority and obviously failed, to the gentle moralist who allows everything, and inexplicably ends up by bringing on his own downfall.

Whoever reads in succession a certain number of these reconstructions will realize soon enough that they are rather depictions of the authors and their ideals more than the clarification or disclosure of an image that has become muddled.
Meanwhile, however, diffidence has been growing towards these many images of Jesus, while His figure seems to be getting farther way from us.

All these attempts have left behind in common the impression that we know very little for sure about Jesus and that it was only much later that the faith shaped His image in its divinity. This impression has penetrated profoundly into the collective consciousness of Christians.

Such a situation has dramatic implications for the faith because it makes uncertain its authentic point of reference itself; the intimate friendship with Jesus, on which everything depends, is threatened because we are left groping in the void.
(...)

N.B. The ellipsis points indicate the part of the Preface that was not released. As the next statement indicates, it presumably has to do with a technical explanation of his research methodology. .

I felt the need to provide the reader with indications of (my research) method because they determine the path I took in inerpreting the figure of Jesus in the New Testament.

For my presentation of Jesus, it meant above all that I trust the Gospels. Of course, I take into account what the Council and modern exegesis say about literary genres, about the tendentiousness (intenzionalita) of statements made, in the communitarian context of the Gospel and what they say to us in a living context.

Even granting all that, as much as I possibly could, I have wished to try and present the Jesus of the Gospels as the true Jesus, as the 'historical Jesus' in the true sense of the expression.

I am convinced - and I hope that the reader will also realize this - that this figure is much more logical, and from the historical point of view, even more understandable than the reconstructions that we have had to confront in the last few decades.

I maintain that this Jesus - the Jesus of the Gospels - is a sensible and convincing historical figure. Only if something extraordinary had happened, only if the figure and the words of Jesus radically surpassed all the hopes and expectations of his epoch, can His Crucifixion and its effect be explained.

Already 20 years after the death of Christ we find displayed in that great hymn to Christ in Paul's Letter to the Ephesians (2,6-8) a Christology in which Jesus says he was equal to God but stripped Himself of that Godhood, became man, humiliated Himself up to His death on the Cross; and that to this Christ belongs the homage of Creation, that adoration which through the prophet Isaias (45,23), God proclaimed to be owed to Him alone.

Critical research rightfully asks: What happened during those twenty years since the Crucifixion of Jesus? How was this Christology arrived at?

The action of collective anonymous authorship, which its advocates seek to establish, does not explain anything. How could unknown groupings be so creative, so convincing, and impose themselves so powerfully?

Is it not more logical, even from the historical viewpoint, that greatness was there from the beginning and that the figure of Jesus so sprung the bounds of all known categories that it could only be understood as a mystery of God?

Naturally, to believe that, even as man he was also God, and making this known by wrapping it up in parables, although in a manner that became ever more clear, also surpasses the possibilities of the historical method.

But on the contrary, if starting from this conviction of faith, we read the texts with the historical method and its openness to what is great, these texts open up to show a life and a figure who are worthy of that faith.

Then even the multi-layered struggle that is carried on in the writings of the New Testament around the figure of Jesus becomes clear, and nowithstanding their diversity , (we see that) these writings are profoundly in agreement.

It is clear that with this concept of the figure of Christ, I am going beyond what Schnackenburg for instance says as the voice of much of contemporary exegesis.

I hope,however, that the reader understands this book was not written against modern exegesis, but with great recognition of much that it has given us and continues to give us.

It has made us discover a great quantity of sources and concepts through which the figure of Jesus can become present for us with a liveliness and depth that a few decades earlier we could not even have imagined.

All I have done is to go beyond mere historico-critical interpretation, by applying new methodological criteria which allow us a proper theological interpretation of the Bible and which naturally demand faith without at the same time renouncing historical seriousness.

Certainly, there should be no need to say explicitly that this book is absolutely not a magisterial action, but is only the expression of my personal research into the 'face of the Lord" (Ps 27,8). And so everyone is free to contradict me. I only ask the reader for his or her sympathy in advance, without which there can be no understanding.

As I said at the start of this Preface, my interior journey towards this book has been long. I was only able to start working on it during the summer vacation of 2003. In August 2004 I was able to give definitive form to Chapters 1-4. After I was elected to the See of Rome, I have used all my free time to move it along.

Since I do not know how much more time nor strength I will be granted, I have now decided to have the first ten chapters published as Part I, starting with the Baptism in the Jordan River to Peter's confession and the Transfiguration.


Rome, Feast of St. Jerome
30 September 2006
Joseph Ratzinger – Benedict XVI

P.S. A korazym. org story makes clear that the text of the Preface released by Rizzoli (and translated above) was "the beginning and the end" of said Preface.

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 22/11/2006 14.39]

Teresa, I must really thank you for this speedy translation of the Pope's preface. It has given me some indications of his approach, although I wish they did not leave out the section on the method used by Benedict. Now we'll have to wait until spring 2007...
I just can't wait to read this book, but do you think it will be translated immediately? It surely cannot be kept in its Italian jacket alone? I may be wrong but Papa's new book may be just the thing that thousands (millions?) are waiting for who had been in an ambiguous quandery for years now because of their knowledge of the different perceptions on the historical Jesus. I have read many of the studies of historical Jesus scholars through the past two decades and it nearly made me lose my faith in the divinity of Jesus Christ. Many do lose their faith completely. Because the Pope doesn't seem to ignore historical scholarship but tackles the problems it presents for innocent believers, this book will restore the shaken faith of many, I think. I am glad that he does seem to acknowledge the bonus aspects of modern exegesis and scholarship though, because his most critical readers will be people such as Domenic Crossan, Geza Vermes ( is he still alive?) and co.

I hope you can bring good news regarding translations, Teresa. I'll never tackle the Italian version.....

korazym.org does Sandro Magister one better...It also has published the excerpt from the Introduction to the book that was made available yesterday. Actually, korazym had the best wrap-up article of all, and I'll get around to translating it after I've done this one:
=============================================================

"From what we read in the excerpt that we have been given from the Introduction," Fr. Federico Lombardi explains, "Jesus is presented as the new Moses, the new prophet who speaks with God 'face to face', who is the Son profoundly united with the Father. If this central aspect of the figure of Jesus is set aside, then He becomes contradictory and incomprehensible. Joseph Ratzinger speaks to us with passion of the intimate union of Jesus with the Father and wishes to involve the disciple who follows Jesus in this communion.

"We will therefore be reading a great work of exegesis and theology but also of spirituality. I think of the great impression and the spiritual fruit that I gained as a young man from reading Ratzinger's first great expositional work, Introduction to Christianity, (and) I am certain that even this time, we will not be disappointed, and whether we are believers or not - all persons who are truly willing to understand more profoundly the figure of Jesus Christ - we will be immensely grateful to the Pope for his great testimony as a thinker, a scholar and a man of faithon the most essential point of the Christian faith."

***************************************************************

(From 'JESUS OF NAZARETH', by Joseph Ratzinger, Rizzoli 2007)

Introduction:. A first look at the secret of Jesus.

(...) In Jesus the promise of the new prophet is fulfilled. In Him is fully realized what in Moses was imperfect: He lives in the presence of God, not only as a friend but as the Son, in profound union with the Father.

Only from this can we truly understand the figure of Jesus that we meet in the New Testament. Everything that we are told - the words, the actions, the suffering and the glory of Jesus - is based on this. If we set aside this authentic center, we ignore what is specific about the figure of Jesus, which then becomes contradictory and indeed, incomprehensible.

Only from this can one answer a question which everyone who reads the New Testament must ask himself: Where did Jesus get His teachings from? How does one explain His coming?

The reaction of his listeners was clear: His teachings did not come from any known school. It is radically different from that which could be learned in any school. It is not a lesson drawn according to a certain method of interpretation, it is different, it is an explanation 'with authority.'

We will get back to this perception by His listeners when we reflect on the words of Jesus and we seek to examine their significance.

Jesus's teaching does not come from any human learning whatsoever. It comes from His immediate contact with the Father, a dialog 'face to face', from seeing what is 'in the bosom of the Father.' It is the word of the Son. Without this interior foundation, His words would have been sheer recklessness. As the wise men of the Temple in Jesus's time judged them to be, precisely because they would not see its interior significance: a seeing and knowing 'face to face' (with God).

To know Jesus it is fundamental to take note of the recurrent references to the fact that Jesus would retire 'up a mountain' and would pray there the whole night, 'alone' with the Father. These brief references lift the veil of mystery somewhat, allowing us to look into the filial existence of Jesus, to examine the wellspring of His actions, of His teaching and of His sufferings.

This 'praying' by Jesus is the Son speaking to the Father, in which Jesus's human consciousness and will, His human soul, is involved, so that man's 'prayer' can become a participation in the communion of the Son with the Father.

The famous statement of Harnack that Jesus's pronouncements come from the Father, in which the Son does not take part - which would mean that Christology does not come from Jesus's teaching - is a hypothesis that belies itself. Jesus can speak of the Father, as He does, only because He is the Son who lives in filial communion with the Father. The Christological dimension - that is, the mystery of the Son who reveals the Father - this 'Christology,' is present in all the statements and actions of Jesus.

Here another important point is evident. We said that in the filial communion of Jesus with the Father, His human soul is inolved in the act of prayer. Who sees Jesus sees the Father (Jn 14,9). The disciple who follows Jesus thus becomes involved together with Him in the communion with God.

And this is what truly saves us: this surpassing of human limits. This potential to surpass his limits is inherent in man as an expectation and a possibility from the moment he was created in the image of God. ...
================================================================

And I'm still on a 'high' from the big news ....

Will someone tell me of any comparable writer the age of Papino now (going on 80) who is still so prodigious - at an age when his contemporaries would be sliding into senility if they have not already done so! Who produces in less than two years an encyclical of the unique litarary and spiritual significance of 'Deus caritas est', the lecture at Regensburg, and the first major biography of Jesus Christ in decades - not to mention all those homilies, messages and catecheses that distinguish his Papacy so incomparably?

Joseph Ratzinger-Benedict XVI, you are truly a phenomenon! I daresay if you weren't Pope, you would probably have even considered writing a book on Mohammed as well, if only to instruct us Christians on who we need to deal with (or come to terms with)! Or maybe Martin Luther, on whom you are an authority.


P.S. 11/22/06
Not surprisingly, VIS (for Vatican Information Services) comes out one day late with a story in its English service on Fr. Lombardi's note about the Pope's new book that was released yesterday to the news media (but not posted on the Vatican site). The two paragraphs quoted by korazym at the beginning of this post with their wrap-up story about the book yesterday, are part of the Lombardi statement. For the record, here is the VIS report:

VATICAN CITY, NOV 22, 2006 (VIS) - Holy See Press Office Director Fr. Federico Lombardi S.J., has written a note concerning a forthcoming book by Benedict XVI, scheduled for publication in the spring of 2007. The title of the volume is: "Gesu di Nazareth. Dal Battesimo nel Giordano alla Trasfigurazione" (Jesus of Nazareth, From His Baptism in the Jordan to the Transfiguration).

The Vatican Publishing House, which holds the copyright on all the Pope's writings, has ceded the world rights for the translation, distribution and marketing of this book to the Rizzoli Publishing House.

"The fact that Benedict XVI has managed to complete the first part of his great book on Jesus, and that within a few months we will have it in our hands, is wonderful news," writes Fr. Lombardi in his note. "I find it extraordinary that despite the duties and concerns of the pontificate, he has managed to complete a work of such great academic and spiritual depth. He says he dedicated all his free time to the project; and this itself is a very significant indication of the importance and urgency the book has for him.

"With his habitual simplicity and humility, the Pope explains that this is not a 'work of Magisterium' but the fruit of his own research, and as such it can be freely discussed and criticized. This is a very important observation, because it makes clear that what he writes in the book in no way binds the research of exegetes and theologians. It is not a long encyclical on Jesus, but a personal presentation of the figure of Jesus by the theologian Joseph Ratzinger, who has been elected as Bishop of Rome."

In the book's preface, Fr. Lombardi's note says, the Holy Father "explains that in modern culture, and in many presentations of the figure of Jesus, the gap between the 'historical Jesus' and the 'Christ of the faith' has become ever wider. ... Joseph Ratzinger, taking into consideration all the achievements of modern research, aims to present the Jesus of the Gospels as the real 'historical Jesus,' as a sensible and convincing figure to Whom we can and must trustingly refer, and upon Whom we have good reason to base our faith and our Christian life. With his book, then, the Pope aims to offer a fundamental service to support the faith of his brothers and sisters, and he does so from the central element of the faith: Jesus Christ."
....
[The last two paragraphs of the report are the two paragraphs quoted at the start of this post].

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 22/11/2006 22.55]

22 November, 2006
VATICAN
Pope: 'May wounded Lebanon
reject violence, seek justice
and reconciliation'

At the end of the general audience, Benedict XVI talked about the murder of Pierre Gemayel and appealed to the international community to move to eliminate so many injustices in the Middle East.


Vatican City (AsiaNews) – The murder of the Christian minister, Pierre Gemayel, in Beirut yesterday evening should prompt the Lebanese people to work together to build national unity and countries with the welfare of the Middle East at heart to strive to eliminate injustice afflicting it.

Benedict XVI talked about the latest murder in Lebanon at the end of the general audience, launching an appeal to the Lebanese people to refute violence and to the international community to face the tragic situation in the Middle East.

The pope expressed “profound sorrow” for the “brutal murder” of Gemayel, which he “firmly condemned”. He said: “I give assurance of my prayers and spiritual closeness to the family in mourning and the beloved Lebanese people.”

He continued: “Faced with the dark forces that are seeking to destroy the country, I invite all Lebanese not to allow hatred to triumph but to develop national unity, justice and reconciliation and to work together to build a future of peace together. I invite state leaders who have the interest of Lebanon at heart to contribute to a global, negotiated solution to heal the situations of injustice that have marked the region for many years.”

In the catechesis for the general audience, Benedict XVI talked about the unity of the Church, “body” and “bride” of Christ, in the multiplicity of charisms that the Spirit calls forth, born of the union with its founder.

The reality of the Church in Paul’s thinking, “one of the most important themes of his thinking”, was tackled by Benedict XVI during the general audience, attended by 20,000 people in spite of a day marked by heavy rainfall. St Peter’s Square was packed with thousands of multi-coloured umbrellas.

[Vatican Radio reported that some 50,000 braved torrential rains to hear the Pope in St. Peter's Square, more than double the number expected.]


“Let us hope that the Lord is propitious and makes this rain stop,” said the pope, whose words were followed shortly afterwards by a timid ray of sun. “I would like to thank the Lord for giving us a moment of light and a break from the rain,” he added jokingly at the end of the audience.


Indeed, Benedict-weather prevailed for the rest of the audience till the Pope's final pass-through in the Popemobile.

Recalling the thinking of Paul, to whom he today dedicated his reflection for the fourth time, the pope said: “His first contact with the person of Jesus came through the Christian community of Jerusalem” of which, for three times, the apostle says “I persecuted the Church of God”. Even if in Paul’s case, the meeting was not positive: “History shows that one reaches Jesus going through the Church.”

For Paul, “adherence was propitiated by a direct intervention of Christ” who on his way to Damascus personified the Church by saying that He was being persecuted when the Church was persecuted. Thus it is understandable that the Church was always very present in the thinking and activities of Paul, who set up various churches in cities he evangelized. Some would cause him concern and displeasure, but he never ceased to love them.

Paul, continued Benedict XVI, “shows us his doctrine on the Church as such, as the definition of the Church as the body of Christ”. The pope said we find the root of his “astounding definition” in the definition of the body of Christ and also in the Eucharist. “All of you are one in the body of Christ,” wrote Paul. The pope said: “It is from here that the greatness and uniqueness of the Church comes, of all of us who form part of it, being parts, members of Christ.”

Underlining the need for unity however does not mean “maintaining that Christian life should be made uniform and hammered out according to only one way of working,” said Benedict XVI, adding that Paul himself had cited countless Charismatic manifestations of the Spirit.

For the apostle, then, everything should “contribute to weaving the ecclesial fabric”, both vertical, between Jesus and the faithful, and horizontal, between “all those who distinguish themselves in the world because they invoke the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.” He added: “It is well understood how desirable it is that what St Paul hoped for will be realized.”

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

I won't be able to do my usual translation of the catechesis until later today.

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 23/11/2006 21.30]

Crotchet,

At the bottom of that little story I posted above from Catholic News Service, it says that Papa's new book will first come out in Italian and German. You read German, no?