BENEDICT XVI: NEWS, PAPAL TEXTS, PHOTOS AND COMMENTARY

ALWAYS AND EVER OUR MOST BELOVED BENEDICTUS XVI

Benedict XVI's 'sky-high' interviews:
24 inflight Q&A sessions with newsmen
preceding each of his 24 trips abroad
Book review by Luca Rolandi
Adapted and translated from the Italian service of

April 27, 2013

All sorts of books have been written about the Popes [especially the contemporary Popes] that could in any way capture the attention of readers, whether believers or non-believers.

Among the spate of recent books dedicated to Benedict XVI, a beautiful book published by the Vatican publishing house LEV, edited by Angela Ambrogetti, stands out. She is one of the younger correspondents covering the Vatican, having started out as a reporter for Vatican Radio [she now edits korazym, an online journal born out of the youth movements that sprung up with the institution of the World Youth Days].

In 2011, Ambrogetti edited the LEV publication dedicated to the inflight interviews given by John Paul II.

In both books, she worked for months listening to Vatican Radio tapes of the interviews and transcribing them. In 2011 as now, she presents the reader with a rare legacy from John Paul II and Beendict XVI [the two Popes so far who have used the opportunity of having some newsmen travelling with them on their apostolic visits abroad in order to answer their questions, not just on issues relevant to the visit they are undertaking but on Church issues that concern the whole world and not just Catholics].

Ambrogetti herself was on many of these flights with Benedict XVI and could therefore appreciate first-hand the Pope's profundity not just in matters of faith but in his philosophical look at the human condition. All this delivered extemporaneously, and literally on the fly, as the Pope left Rome to visit other countries.

One must also note the beautiful photographs [from the photo service of L'Osservatore Romano] that illustrate the volume.

In the Preface, Mons. Georg Gaenswein, Benedict XVI's secretary, writes: "These interviews provide a context for what the Holy Father would go on to say in each of the countries he visited... His relationship with the media has always been direct and frank, and never once did he indicate any attitude of closing himself in. Benedict XVI respects the mass media, but he is not a populist - he has never sought to say or act according to what others would like him to say and do. He was always fully conscious of his responsibility as the Pastor of the universal Church".

Fr. Federico Lombardi, director of the Vatican press office, in his introduction of the book, praises Ambrogetti for having reviewed and transcribed the integral tapes of the in-flight sessions provided by Vatican Radio.

The sessions are not 'ambush' interviews nor an exchange of light talk. The answers given by Benedict XVI reflect his usual elevated thinking and profound reflection, with those pearls of wisdom and holiness that Papa Ratzinger never failed to dispense, in his fraternal desire to say something that would be understood and remembered in the multimedia babel of today's communications.

Fr. Lombardi writes: "The Pope never refused or objected to any question that was presetned to him". [The Vatican Press Office established the SOP of asking the journalists flying with the Pope to submit their individual questions, out of which he would choose the most representative and most interesting questions to ask the Pope.]

The interviews show that the issues confronted were wide-ranging. In the line of fire, Benedict XVI responds with patience and wisdom, which are well demonstrated in the 24 sessions transcribed, from his first trip abroad as Pope to WYD in Cologne in August 2005, to his last papal visit, to Lebanon in September 2012.

A book to savor because it is both simple and intriguing. One that allows the reader to perceive the theological thought, the profound culture, the high spirituality and the sure leadership that Benedict XVI impressed on the Church and the faithful through his words.

In many ways, these Q&A exchanges with the newsmen who accompanied him on his apostolic visits abroad provide an excellent overview of his Pontificate. (The book includes brief biographical data on the journalists who asked the questions.)




This month, the Vatican publishing house LEV has issued three booklets on Pope Francis:

The first one, Vi chiedo di pregare per me. Inizio del Ministero Petrino di Papa Francesco ('I ask you to pray for me': The beginning of Pope Francis's Petrine ministry), presents in 96 pp the texts of 19 statements, addresses and homilies delivered by the new Pope from his first introduction to the world on March 13, 2005, to his first Reginal caeli remarks on April 1.

The second, Varcare la soglia della fede (crossing the threshold of faith) is his 40-page letter to the Archdiocese of Buenos Aires on the occasion of the Year of Faith.

And the third, Noi come cittadine, noi come popolo: Verso un bicentenario di giustizia e solidarieta (We as citizens, we as people: Towards a bicentenary of justice and solidarity), another 96-page booklet containing his reflections on the bicentennial anniversary of independence for most of the Latin American countries in 2010-2016.



Also from LEV in April 2013:


The LEV covers have generally been blah! or atrocious, and it was the fate of the theological dictionary of Joseph Ratzinger, compiled in 2012 by Mons. Robert Zollitsch on the occasion of the Year of Faith, to get what is probably the most atrocious cover in LEV history, especially when you compare it to the original edition in German, as I showed in my original post about this book, from an article in OR.

Joseph Ratzinger's writings have been so prodigious that one could quote him on possibly every major aspect of the Church, the faith, the modern world and contemporary society. Thus, Antonio Socci, longtime commentator on religion, who has long been a Ratzinger follower, now offers this advice, taken from a 1981 homily by Cardinal Ratzinger to Italy's politicians who are seeking to launch a new government of compromise, i.e., a coalition of the three divergent political movements that won the most seats in the last parliamentary elections - the center-left under the newly=designated Prime Minister Enrico Letta, the center-right under former Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, and an 'anti-political' populist party led by comedian Beppe Grillo which got 25% of the vote.

The Ratzingerian apologia
for compromise in politics
by Antonio Socci

April 27, 2013

There is a 'revolutionary' document that is worth re-reading today because it illuminates the present political situation. It should be meditated upon by the supporters of the nascent Letta government as well as its most rabid opponents.

It is a formidable philosophical and theological praise of compromise as a political morality. And it is an unappealable rejection of maximalisms, utopianisms, fundamentalisms, ideologies and jhaobinisms in all ages and latitudes (that is, either atheist or religious, left or right).

This discourse - particularly valuable in these days when the diea of compromise is denounced because it is confused with deal-making and maneuvering - was written by the then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger.

He gave it as a homily on November 26, 1981, at a Mass for the Catholic members of the Bundestag (German parliament) in the church of St. Winfried in Bonn. [Before the reunification of Germany after the Berlin Wall fell in 1989, Bonn was the capital of the Federal Republic.]

The text was then published in the book Church, ecumenism and politics under the title "Biblical aspects of the theme faith and politics".

He begins by explaining that "The state is not the whole of human existence and does not encompass all human hope... This unburdens the politician and at the same time opens up for him the path of reasonable politics".

A similar affirmation - which is typically Christian because in the pre-Christian epoch, power tended to divinize itself, to assert itself as absolute - is the basis of true secularity. Because it affirms that one should not expect happiness and the Absolute Good from politics.

"The Christian faith," the cardinal noted, "destroyed the myth of the divine state, the myth of the earthly paradise or utopian state and of a society without rule. In its place it put the objectivity of reason".

Thus politics is called to good governance of human affairs, according to criteria of realism, gradualism and rationality, in the direction of freedom and human dignity.

With the conscious acceptance of the imperfection that characterizes earthly reality.

Instead, the desire for happiness or for the Absolute Good that will fill the human heart is an infinite desire that politics must serve but that it can never appease. They must be sought elsewhere.

Every time that politics was invested with messianic expectations, of purification, redemption, liberation, it has given birth to totalitarian ideologies and systems which - after having promised paradise on earth - created hells instead.

Indeed, Ratzinger observes in the homily, "when the Christian faith falls into ruins and faith in mankind's greater hope is lost, the myth of the divine state rises again, because man cannot do without the totality of hope".

Since it was Christianity that brought about the secularization of the State and of politics, ideologies and totalitarianisms flared up along with de=Christianization.

After the disappearance of the systematic toltalitarian ideologies of the 20th century, an analogous temptation - political messianism - continues to flourish today in fundamentalisms, in moralistic and Jacobin utopianisms, in Manichaean fanaticisms which see in one party Absolute Good and in the opposing party, Absolute Evil.

Ratzinger has a clear judgment: "Such politics, which declares that the kingdom of God is the outcome of politics and twists faith into the universal primacy of the political, is by its very nature the politics of enslavement; it is mythological politics".

And he underscores the importance of the presence of Christians to protect the laicity of the state from fanaticisms, from political messianisms.

He says: "To this, faith opposes Christian reason's sense of proportion, which recognizes what man really can accomplish in terms of a free social order and is content with that, because it knows that mankind's greater expectations are safe in God's hands. To renounce the hope of faith is at the same time to renounce political reason and its sense of proportion. Abandoning the mythical hopes of an authority-free society is not resignation but honesty, which sustains man in hope".

At this point, he introduces a subject that illuminates the present. Today, in Italy, it is substantially three Catholic politicians - Enrico Letta, Angelino Alfano and Mario Mauro - who are leading this new turning point. And if they succeed, they can lead us out of this permanent civil war to a historic pacification, a season of rationality, realism, the common good and prosperity.

It would also he a healthy generational renewal. They are three young politicians with different backgrounds but they share the fact that they are Catholics and that politically, their inspiration is that of De Gasperis [postwar Italian Prime Minister who was one of the Christian Fathers of the European Union (along with Germany's Adenauer and France's Jean Monnet; he has been proposed for beatification]

Indeed, after World War II, it was the Catholic political class led by De Gasperi, who brought Italy out of the incubus of totalitarian ideologies and their myths that had provoked the ruin of Europe.

Why is it that today as then, Catholic politicians appear to have this historical function?

Ratzinger explains: “The first service to politics rendered by the Christian faith is that it liberates man from the irrationality of political myths, which are the real threat of our time."

And here is the splendid Ratzingerian apologia for rationality and compromise:

---

Taking a stand for moderation, which does what is possible and does not cry with an ardent heart after the impossible, is of course always difficult; the voice of reason is not as loud as the cry of unreason.

The cry for the grandiose project has the cachet of morality; restricting oneself to what is possible, in contrast, seems to be the renunciation of moral passion, mere faint-hearted pragmatism. But, as a matter of fact, political morality consists precisely of resisting the seductive force of the big words for which humanity and its chances are being gambled away.

The moral thing is not adventurous moralism, which tries to mind God's business, but rather honesty, which accepts man's limits and does man's work within them. Not the uncompromising stance, but compromise is the true morality in political matters.

---

These are authoritative considerations that we must use as a compass. Today, when once again in the history of this nation, it is Catholic politicians who are trying to tame politics, to rid it of fundamentaliss, to truly secularize it, to show that compromise that is not born of cowardice has a profound morality.

As in the immediate postwar period, reformists, liberals and socialists find themselves thrown together. All of them denounced by the maximalists.

But this opportunity for a turning point must be taken and carried out with a sense of pride, not with shame, if we agree with Joseph Ratzinger that the realism of reason and compromise is truly moral, not utopianism, not jacobinism, not maximalism, not integrationism.

Behind the ideological temptations which, in diverse forms, need an Enemy and claim to make politics the venue for the struggle between Absolute Good and Absolute Evil, there is always some form of Gnosticism, as the great philosopher Erich Voegelin explained in his Myth of a New World.

Christianity liberates us from this ever-incumbent danger. But obviously, Ratzinger concludes, "that does not mean that it brought an objectivity devoid of values, the objectivity of statistics and mere social dynamics. True human objectivity involves humanity, and humanity involves God. True human reason involves morality, which lives on God's commandments. This morality is not a private matter; it has public significance. Without the good of being good and of good action, there can be no good politics".

A new humanism and a new rebirth could be the horizon and ambition of this national pacification effort. If it does not fail and it is not sabotaged. If it does not become a cheap compromise. If the protagonists are capable of facing the greatness of their responsibility.

Quite apart from the implications of Cardinal Ratzinger's extraordinary homily for current Italian politics, it is worthwhile reading it in its entirety, as reproduced in October 2008 in Ignatius Insight Scoop. I might also note that this homily dates to when he had just been named Prefect of the CDF but continued to serve as Archbishop of Munich-Freising until February 1982, when he finally took on his duties in Rome.:


from


Author's note: This homily was given on November 26, 1981, during a liturgy for Catholic representatives to the Bundestag [the Lower House of the German Federal Republic] in the Church of Saint Winfried [Saint Boniface] in Bonn. The readings, 1 Peter 1:3-7 and John 14:1-6, were prescribed by the Church's liturgy for that day. At first they seemed unsuited to the subject, but, on second thought, after closer inspection, they proved to be unexpectedly rich material for this meditation.

The reading and the Gospel that we have just heard stemmed from a situation in which Christians were not a self-organizing subject of the state but were rather outcasts being persecuted by a cruel dictatorship.

They themselves were not allowed to share the responsibility for their state; they could only endure it. Theirs was not the privilege of shaping it as a Christian state but was rather the task of living as Christians in spite of it.

The names of the emperors who reigned during the period to which tradition dates both texts are enough to make the situation clear: Nero and Domitian. And so the First Letter of Peter, too, calls the Christians in such a state strangers or "exiles" (1:1) and the state itself "Babylon" (5:13).

In doing so, it very emphatically indicates the political position of the Christians of that time, which corresponded roughly to the position of the exiled Jews living in Babylon, who were not the subject but rather the objects of that state and therefore had to learn how they could survive in it, since they were not allowed to learn how to build it.

Thus the political background of today's readings is fundamentally different from ours. Nevertheless, they contain three important statements that have significance also for political action among Christians.

1. The state is not the whole of human existence and does not encompass all human hope. Man and what he hopes for extend beyond the framework of the state and beyond the sphere of political action. This is true not only for a state like Babylon, but for every state.

The state is not the totality; this unburdens the politician and at the same time opens up for him the path of reasonable politics. The Roman state was wrong and anti-Christian precisely because it wanted to be the totality of human possibilities and hopes.

A state that makes such claims cannot fulfill its promises; it thereby falsifies and diminishes man. Through the totalitarian lie it becomes demonic and tyrannical. The abolition of the totalitarian state has demythologized the state and thereby liberated man, as well as politicians and politics.

But when the Christian faith falls into ruins and faith in mankind's greater hope is lost, the myth of the divine state rises again, because man cannot do without the totality of hope. Although such promises pose as progress and commandeer for themselves the slogans of progress and progressive thinking, viewed historically they are nevertheless a regression to an era antedating the novum of Christianity, a turning back along the scale of history.

And even though their propaganda says that their goal is man's complete liberation, the abolition of all ruling authority, they contradict the truth of man and are opposed to his freedom, because they force man to fit into what he himself can make.

Such politics, which declares that the kingdom of God is the outcome of politics and twists faith into the universal primacy of the political, is by its very nature the politics of enslavement; it is mythological politics.

To this, faith opposes Christian reason's sense of proportion, which recognizes what man really can accomplish in terms of a free social order and is content with that, because it knows that mankind's greater expectations are safe in God's hands. To renounce the hope of faith is at the same time to renounce political reason and its sense of proportion.

Abandoning the mythical hopes of an authority-free society is not resignation but honesty, which sustains man in hope. The mythical hope of a self-made paradise can only drive man into inescapable anxiety - into fear of the failure of the illusory promises and of the immense emptiness that lurks behind them; into fear of his own power and of its cruelty.

Thus the first service to politics rendered by the Christian faith is that it liberates man from the irrationality of political myths, which are the real threat of our time. Taking a stand for sobriety, which does what is possible and does not cry with an ardent heart after the impossible, is of course always difficult; the voice of reason is not as loud as the cry of unreason.

The cry for the grandiose project has the cachet of morality; restricting oneself to what is possible, in contrast, seems to be the renunciation of moral passion, mere faint-hearted pragmatism. But, as a matter of fact, political morality consists precisely of resisting the seductive force of the big words for which humanity and its chances are being gambled away.

The moral thing is not adventurous moralism, which tries to mind God's business, but rather honesty, which accepts man's limits and does man's work within them. Not the uncompromising stance, but compromise is the true morality in political matters.

2. Although the Christians were being persecuted, they did not have a negative view of the state in principle, but rather they still recognized in it the state qua state and did what was in their power to build it up as a state; they did not try to destroy it.

Precisely because they knew that they were in "Babylon", they applied to themselves the guidelines that Jeremiah had written to the children of Israel who had been exiled to that place.

The letter of the prophet that is recorded in chapter 29 of the Book of Jeremiah was by no means an activist's manual calling for political resistance and the destruction of the slave state, as understandable as that would have been; it is rather an instruction on how to preserve and strengthen what is good. Thus, it is a lesson in surviving and at the same time in preparing for better days and new prospects.

In that sense, this morality of exile also contains basic elements of a positive political ethos. Jeremiah urges the Jews not to persist in contradiction and denial but rather to "build houses and live in them, plant gardens and eat their produce .... Seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile, and pray to the LORD on its behalf, for in its welfare you will find your welfare" (Jer 29:5-7).

We can read a very similar admonition in Paul's First Letter to Timothy, which tradition dates to the time of Nero, where it says to pray "for all men, for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life, godly and respectful in every way" (1 Tim 2:1-2).

Along the same lines, the First Letter of Peter itself admonishes the readers to "maintain good conduct among the Gentiles, so that in case they speak against you as wrongdoers, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day of visitation" (2:12).

"Honor all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the emperor" (2:17).

"But let none of you suffer as a murderer, or a thief, or a wrongdoer, or a mischief-maker; yet if one suffers as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but under that name let him glorify God" (4:15f).

What does this mean? The Christians were by no means fearful, gullible people who were taken in by the authorities and did not know that there can be a right to resistance and even a conscientious duty to resist.

The very last sentence shows that they recognized the limits of the state and did not bow to it in matters where they were not allowed to bow to it because it opposed God's will. Even more importantly, the fact remains that they still did not attempt to destroy that state; rather, they tried to build it up.

Amorality is fought by morality, and evil by a determined adherence to the good, and in no other way. Morality--doing good--is the true resistance, and only the good can be a preparation for a turn for the better.

There are not two kinds of political morality: a morality of resistance and a morality of ruling. There is only one morality: morality as such, the morality of God's commandments, which cannot be temporarily suspended in order to bring about a change in the status quo more quickly.

One can build up only by building up, not by destroying--that is the political ethics of the Bible from Jeremiah to Peter and Paul. The Christian always supports the state, in this sense: he does the positive, the good things that hold states together. He has no fear that he will thereby favor the power of the wicked, but he is convinced that evil can be dismantled and the power of evil and of evil men can be diminished only by strengthening what is good.

Anyone who accepts the killing of the innocent and the destruction of other people's property as part of the bargain cannot appeal to the faith. The words of Saint Peter are quite explicitly against such methods: "Let none of you suffer [condemnation] as a murderer, or a thief" (4:1 )--and at that time he was speaking also against this sort of resistance.

The true, Christian resistance that he is demanding occurs only in the situation where the state demands the repudiation of God and of his commandments, where it demands evil, against which good is still commanded.

3. A final point follows logically from this. The Christian faith destroyed the myth of the divine state, the myth of the earthly paradise or utopian state and of a society without rule. In its place it put the objectivity of reason.

But that does not mean that it brought an objectivity devoid of values, the objectivity of statistics and mere social dynamics. True human objectivity involves humanity, and humanity involves God. True human reason involves morality, which lives on God's commandments.

This morality is not a private matter; it has public significance. Without the good of being good and of good action, there can be no good politics.

What the persecuted Church prescribed for Christians as the core of their political ethos must also be the core of an active Christian politics: only where good is done and is recognized as good can people live together well in a thriving community.

Demonstrating the practical importance of the moral dimension, the dimension of God's commandments--publicly as well--must be the center of responsible political action.

If we act in this way, then even in the midst of confusion and adversity we can understand the words from today's Scriptures as a reliable promise addressed to us personally: "Let not your hearts be troubled" (Jn 14:1). "By God's power [you] are guarded through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed" (1 Pet 1:5). Amen.

About the book itself, from the blurb on the book jacket:

---

Church, Ecumenism and Politics:
New Endeavors in Ecclesiology
by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger

This work features the most discussed topics of the life of the Church, treated with unique frankness and depth by the Church's spiritual and theological leader. In this collection of essays, theologian Joseph Ratzinger, now Benedict XVI, tackles three major issues in the Church today--the nature of the Church, the pursuit of Christian unity, and the relationship of Christianity to the secular/political power.

The first part of the book explores Vatican II's teaching on the Church, what it means to call the Church "the People of God", the role of the Pope, and the Synod of Bishops.

In part two, Ratzinger frankly assesses the ecumenical movement--its achievements, problems, and principles for authentic progress toward Christian unity.

In the third part of the work, Ratzinger discusses both fundamental questions and particular issues concerning the Church, the state and human fulfillment in the Age to come. What does the Bible say about faith and politics? How should the Church work in pluralistics societies? What are the problems with Liberation Theology? How should we understand freedom in the Church and in society?

Beneath a penetrating analysis on these important topics by this brilliant teacher and writer, both concise and also surprising, is revealed the passion of a great spiritual leader. The result is an exciting and stimulating work, which can be provoking, but never boring.

"In tricky theological disputes, Pope Benedict XVI separates the wheat from the chaff--a gift for precision that defines this compendium of his thought on ecclesiology and ecumenism. Dating from the 1970s and 1980s, the essays, interviews and lectures contained in this book remain highly relevant. Careful distinctions are his winnowing fork as he cuts through the confusion to identify what is orthodox and heterodox in the important controversies of our time."
- George Neumayr, Editor, Catholic World Report

"In this wonderful collection of essays, Pope Benedict XVI offers to us a sophisticated, though accessible, understanding of the relationship between politics, the church, and the differing religious communities that encounter one another across the globe. The vision that the Pope imparts is one that supports religious liberty without entailing theological relativism. He shows us that one can take theology and ecclesiology seriously, as authoritative knowledge traditions, without rejecting the best insights of Enlightenment liberalism."
- Francis J. Beckwith
Associate Professor of Philosophy and Church-State Studies, Baylor University.

---

Despite a few lapses - a couple of them truly offensive to Benedict XVI - the following article joins John Allen's piece as a cold douche of reality to temper the instant mythology that has been built about Pope Francis...

The first 40 days:
What Francis has said and done
by Marco Tosatti
Translated from the Italian service of

April 27, 2013

In truth, after the first weeks of great enthusiasm and renewed faith for many [That is truly offensive - what did Benedict XVI do: snuff out the faith of those many to the point it had to be renewed????], the ordinary time of the Petrine ministry begins for Pope Francis in the governance of the Church.

Pope Francis is slowly, cautiously taking charge. In the first 40 days since his election on March 13, he has said and done many things. All significant. Let us try to get an overview in order to understand in what direction he is leading the Church.

But first, it must be noted that it would be ingenuous to think that a Pope who came 'from the end of the world' has been ignorant of what has been happening in the Vatican. [I never quite took to that 'from the end of the world' turn of phrase, as Buenos Aires is hardly 'from the end of the world' and has always considered itself 'the Paris of the Americas'.]

At least two persons - a layman and a prelate in a very important congregation of the Roman Curia always kept him informed of the situation. At least two who are known, but one cannot exclude that the former Archbishop of Buenos Aires did not have other, less obvious lookouts at the Vatican.

He has never had a personal secretary and has chosen not to name one now that he is Pope. [What then is the role of Mons. Alfred Xuereb who was announced as his private secretary? It is also disingenuous to think a Pope can possibly do without a private secretary. Even Joseph Ratzinger, whose memory and mind has been likened to a computer hard drive, needed one.]

Meanwhile, he prefers to continue living at Domus Santa Marta. He looked at the papal apartment [that had been occupied by all the Popes before him since Leo XIII] and even three smaller apartments on the third floor of the Apostolic Palace. "Nice," he said, "but what would I do by myself?"

He was told he would not be alone since he would at least have the company of his secretary and of sisters to run his household. He answered, "Behind sisters, there is always a priest, and behind a priest, there is always a bishop..." So in short, he may like people in general, but trusting in them is something else. [Very strange remark! And I don't know why Tosatti even decided to report this.]

So what has he done so far?

He has formed a council of eight cardinals from around the world to give him advice and recommendations on reforming the Church. And there will be reforms. But perhaps not as fast as people expect.

The first meeting of this council will be at the start of October (six months since it was constituted). This move, like others by Francis, was well received by Catholics and non-Catholics. [Is that not a premature conclusion, considering that no one knows anything about this Council so far except the names of its members and its general mandate? It's like saying they welcome a good intention - who does not? = but it is so far a symbolic gesture, almost cosmetic even, to say that yes, the Pope is doing something about a problem that obsessed the cardinals who elected him.]

He took away the annual 25,000-euro bonus received by the five cardinals in charge of overseeing the IOR (about which the Pope has said words that leave the possibilities open for its reform or closure). [He said, textually, "But there are those from the IOR - excuse me, eh? - all this is necessary, offices are necessary, OK? But they are necessary to a certain point - as a help to this story of love. And when the organization takes the first place, love is forgotten, and the Church, poor thing, becomes an NGO. This is not the way!" Those words have spawned a plethora of speculation about what Francis plans to do with IOR, despite denials by Fr. Lombardi of reports like the Pope has asked for the dossiers on all the lay depositor clients of IOR, and even admissions by the media that the Pope cannot very well dissolve IOR, which despite its problems - often exaggerated in the media and in the eyes of sanctimonious cardinals - it has been fulfilling its primary function which is to provide the Pope with funds for 'works of religion' to supplement the contributions of the worldwide Church through the dioceses and the religious orders.]

And he has given to charity the bonuses which were normally given to Vatican employees upon the election of a new Pope. For these, too, unanimous appreciation.

He has met with the Prefect for the Doctrine of the Faith Gerhard Mueller, from which two announcements followed. The first, that the fight against sexual abuses committed by priests will continue along the rigorous lines set down by Benedict XVI The second, that the Pope approves the critical assessment made after an apostolic visitation of the doctrinal deviations and behavior of the sisters belonging to the Leadership Conference of Women Religious in the USA, and the decision to place them under episcopal supervision. The assessment says that "the current doctrinal and pastoral situation of the LCWR is a serious matter of grave concern".

He has accepted the resignation of a South African bishop before reaching retirement age - as Benedict XVI did in the case of more than 80 bishops - on the basis of Article 401, Seciton 2, of the Code of Canon Law, which is often cited when the resignation is due to problems other than poor health.

He has named two new US bishops, both considered 'orthodox' in orientation - Michael Jackels is now the Bishop of Dubuque, Iowa, and Mons. John Folda as Bishop of Fargo, North Dakota.

In conclusion: The image that Pope Francis has projected so far is that of a moderate man who is silent [???] and determined , who wishes a Church that is more moderate and sensitive to the criticisms and judgment of the world in terms of finance and morality. [Hey, Mr. Tosatti - are you saying that the Church under Benedict XVI was insensitive to matters of finance and morality - after all the revolutionary moves he made against sexual abuse and financial transparency> - which he did, not because of what the world thought, but simply because they were right and necessary!

Which is the standard Pope Francis would use, as well - he will and should do things because they are right for the Church, not guided by what the world thinks, because the world has different criteria. To respond to what the world thinks is to play the image game.

And it's odd of Tosatti to use the adjective 'silent' for a Pope who delivers a homily every day that is duly and rightly reported by Vatican Radio and all the Vatican communications outlets. In fact, it is odd that Tosatti omits mentioning those daily homilies, the one genuine ongoing and substantial (as opposed to symbolic) novelty that Pope Francis has introduced so far.]

A man who from the doctrinal and disciplinary angle appears to be on the same wavelength as his predecessor. [Ah, so! Note that the last few paragraphs, referring to deeds actually carried out - ratifying the CDF positions taken by Benedict XVI, sacking a misbehaving bishop, and naming two 'orthodox' bishops - are right out of the Ratzinger papal playbook. Everything described before that was cosmetic. ]

To my regret, I do not have any parallel stories about the first 30 days or 40 days of Benedict XVI's Pontificate, as I did not get into Forum mode till late August 2005. But I'll try to search what there is online...

Looking at the new 'new atheism'
Beware the patronising ‘new new atheists’
who have adopted a philosophical middle ground
but are still firmly anti-God and anti-religion
By Freddy Gray

25 April 2013

Have you heard about the New New Atheism? The old New Atheism is finished, as Ed West pointed out in these pages last month. It was a Noughties fad, like Emo or MySpace.

Richard Dawkins’s crusade against the religion “virus” excited lots of people in the aftermath of 9/11 and the global panic about Islamic extremism. Today it just sounds tired and silly – and the whole angry atheist vogue seems little more than a brilliant publishing stunt to sell big books to small minds.

Dawkins himself has turned into a sad figure, an attention-seeking old man who insults Muslims on Twitter. The other atheist stars have faded, too. Christopher Hitchens is dead. And can you remember anything Sam Harris and Daniel Dennett have said? Nope, nor can I.

In their place, another breed of nuanced atheists has emerged – with books of their own to flog. They disdain Dawkins for his fundamentalism and his rudeness. They are quick to recognise the strengths of religion and admit the shortcomings of unbelief.

Their high priest is not a scientist, but Alain de Botton, the pop philosopher and author of Religion for Atheists (just £8.99 on Amazon, thanks very much). De Botton says that religions are “too intermittently useful, effective and intelligent to be abandoned to the religious alone”.

He intends to “steal” – he puts the word in inverted commas – some of the most useful parts of religion and deploy them in the service of secular Humanism. Instead of priests, he wants better therapists. Instead of Scripture, he wants high-brow literature. Instead of churches, he wants museums to be places of “consolation, meaning and redemption”. In short, he wants to re-invent culture as religion. Well, good luck with that, Alain.

A number of other prominent atheists are talking about the need for a less strident secularism. Douglas Murray, the conservative intellectual, admits that life without religion can be hollow and that secularism is “faint on human suffering”.

“Just because something is not literally true does not mean that there is no truth, or worth, in it,” he says. Murray is inspired by Richard Holloway, the former Anglican Bishop of Edinburgh who these days prides himself on being post-faith. Holloway says he doesn’t believe in Christianity any more, but he still “wants to have it around”.

The New Atheism of the 2000s was caused in part by a secular exasperation at organised religion’s stubborn refusal to disappear from public life. But the newer atheism sees that anger is not an attractive position in the long run – especially not if it’s coming from people who say they cherish rationality above all else.

The New New Atheists are nothing if not reasonable. Attacking religion for its own sake just seems petty to them. Fashionable feminist writers such as Tanya Gold and Zoe Williams are not interesting in picking on the devout old ladies who set up soup kitchens. That would be self-defeating. They would much rather keep their powder dry for the bigger fight against the dreaded Religious Right – which means any Christian who doesn’t fully support them on gay marriage, gay adoption, abortion, condoms, hating Tories, the whole Left-liberal shebang.

In one sense, then, the newer atheism is just a more targeted sneering – at those whose faith is uncompromising, like Catholics, for instance, or Evangelicals, or indeed Richard Dawkins. But something deeper is happening here, too.

We might even be witnessing the beginnings of a reformation in the post-Christian world. Dawkins and co are the puritanical iconoclasts. The newcomers are more agnostic, even if many of them would be loath to admit it. They are moving away from unbelief and grasping through the medium of doubt for something more profound.

In this respect, the New New Atheism bears more than a passing resemblance to a certain sort of liberal Anglicanism. Both place a very English stress on good manners and fair-mindedness. Both accept the limits of human understanding. Both emphasise the social importance of shared values and ritual. Both appreciate The Selfish Gene and like to cast doubts on the literal veracity of the gospels. Both are deeply suspicious of firm beliefs and religious zeal.

Just as the Church of England has been described as “the religion at the end of religion”, the Church of de Botton might be called “the atheism at the end of atheism”. Between them, there is plenty of room or what we might call inter-belief system dialogue.

And for a certain type of godless metropolitan trendies, genteel Anglicanism, with its tea drinking and nice vicars, has a certain ironic retro appeal.

At first, Catholics and Evangelicals will welcome the shift away from outright antagonism and towards nuance. It makes for a more polite conversation. It restores our faith in human decency. But at least with Richard Dawkins, we knew where we stood.

There’s something quite patronising about the newer atheists’ attitude to faith: “Of course we are not so stupid as to believe any of it, but that doesn’t meant it isn’t jolly interesting and even handy in the fight against Right-wing individualism.” That’s not just patronising, it might be more destructive.

Dawkins and Hitchens may have set out to finish off religion, but actually they saved several Christian publishers as religiously inclined readers ran to bookshops to arm their minds with good arguments. Still today there seems to be a cottage industry for anti-Dawkins literature.

But the New New Atheists are encroaching on the same intellectual territory, and by adopting the philosophical centre ground – the moderate middle between belief and unbelief – they may well prove more successful than their predecessors at pushing authentic religion towards the margins. Give me old-fashioned bile any day. Come back, Professor Dawkins, all is forgiven.

April 28, 2013, Fifth Sunday of Easter

ST. PIERRE CHANEL (b France 1801, d Futuna,South Pacific 1841)
Marist Priest, Missionary, Martyr
Pierre always wanted to be a missionary but after being ordained as a priest, he was given a parish assignment
to a district considered 'bad', which he managed to rehabilitate during the three years he served it, by his
devotion to the poor. At age 28, he was one of the first to join the new Society of Mary which was dedicated
to missionary work in the South Pacific. He led a small group of Marists that headed there, one of them
staying in New Zealand to be the first bishop of Auckland, while Pierre went on to the island of Futuna, a French
possession halfway between Samoa and Fiji. He had to learn the language and deal with whalers, traders and
warring natives, but he converted a few natives gradually. When he managed to convert the son of the local
chieftain, he was clubbed to death and hacked to pieces. He became the first martyr in Oceania and of the Marist
order. Within a few years, the other missionaries who followed him converted the whole island including the king.
They were also able to recover Pierre's remains, which followed an odyssey from Futuna to Auckland to Sydney,
then finally back to France in 1850. He was beatified in 1889 and canonized in 1954. He is considered the
patron saint of Oceania.
Readings for today's Mass: www.usccb.org/bible/readings/042813.cfm


AT THE VATICAN TODAY

Mass for Confirmands - As a special event in the Year of Faith decreed by Benedict XVI, Pope Francis concelebrated a Mass in St. Peter's Square for Catholics receiving confirmation or who have recently been confirmed, and administered the Sacrament of Confirmation to 44 of them. At the end of the Mass, he also led the Regina caeli prayers.

Here is the Vatican's official English translation of Pope Francis's homily:

---

Dear Brothers and Sisters,
Dear Confirmands,

I would like to offer three short and simple thoughts for your reflection.

1. In the second reading, we listened to the beautiful vision of Saint John: new heavens and a new earth, and then the Holy City coming down from God. All is new, changed into good, beauty and truth; there are no more tears or mourning…

This is the work of the Holy Spirit: he brings us the new things of God. He comes to us and makes all things new; he changes us. The Spirit changes us! And Saint John’s vision reminds us that all of us are journeying towards the heavenly Jerusalem, the ultimate newness which awaits us and all reality, the happy day when we will see the Lord’s face – that marvelous face, the most beautiful face of the Lord Jesus - and be with him for ever, in his love.

You see, the new things of God are not like the novelties of this world, all of which are temporary; they come and go, and we keep looking for more. The new things which God gives to our lives are lasting, not only in the future, when we will be with him, but today as well. God is even now making all things new; the Holy Spirit is truly transforming us, and through us he also wants to transform the world in which we live.

Let us open the doors to the Spirit, let ourselves be guided by him, and allow God’s constant help to make us new men and women, inspired by the love of God which the Holy Spirit bestows on us!

How beautiful it would be if each of you, every evening, could say: Today at school, at home, at work, guided by God, I showed a sign of love towards one of my friends, my parents, an older person! How beautiful!

2. A second thought. In the first reading Paul and Barnabas say that "we must undergo many trials if we are to enter the kingdom of God" (Acts 14:22).

The journey of the Church, and our own personal journeys as Christians, are not always easy; they meet with difficulties and trials. To follow the Lord, to let his Spirit transform the shadowy parts of our lives, our ungodly ways of acting, and cleanse us of our sins, is to set out on a path with many obstacles, both in the world around us but also within us, in the heart.

But difficulties and trials are part of the path that leads to God’s glory, just as they were for Jesus, who was glorified on the cross; we will always encounter them in life! Do not be discouraged! We have the power of the Holy Spirit to overcome these trials!

3. And here I come to my last point. It is an invitation which I make to you, young confirmandi, and to all present.

Remain steadfast in the journey of faith, with firm hope in the Lord. This is the secret of our journey! He gives us the courage to swim against the tide. Pay attention, my young friends: to go against the current; this is good for the heart, but we need courage to swim against the tide.

Jesus gives us this courage! There are no difficulties, trials or misunderstandings to fear, provided we remain united to God as branches to the vine, provided we do not lose our friendship with him, provided we make ever more room for him in our lives.

This is especially so whenever we feel poor, weak and sinful, because God grants strength to our weakness, riches to our poverty, conversion and forgiveness to our sinfulness. The Lord is so rich in mercy: every time, if we go to him, he forgives us.

Let us trust in God’s work! With him we can do great things; he will give us the joy of being his disciples, his witnesses. Commit yourselves to great ideals, to the most important things.

We Christians were not chosen by the Lord for little things; push onwards toward the highest principles. Stake your lives on noble ideals, my dear young people!

The new things of God, the trials of life, remaining steadfast in the Lord. Dear friends, let us open wide the door of our lives to the new things of God which the Holy Spirit gives us. May he transform us, confirm us in our trials, strengthen our union with the Lord, our steadfastness in him: this is a true joy! So may it be.

---

A similar event was led by Benedict XVI on June 20, 2012, in Milan, but without the Mass and administering Confirmation. His address to them was yet another example of how he spoke to young people very accessibly without talking down to them...




Day 2:
MEETING WITH YOUNG PEOPLE
who were recently confirmed
or about to be confirmed

June 2, 2012



As part of his Apostolic Visit to Milan, Pope Benedict XVI met with young people who are preparing for Confirmation, or who have recently received it.

Addressing the 'confirmands' gathered in Milan’s San Siro stadium on Saturday morning, the Holy Father spoke about the gifts of the Holy Spirit, saying that they are a “stupendous reality that will allow them to be formed as Christians, to live the Gospel, and to be active members of the community.”

Through the grace of these gifts, the Holy Father continued, one can enter into a more profound relationship with Christ.

“Christian life,” he said, “is a journey, it is like hiking up a mountain path in the company of Jesus. With these precious gifts [of the Holy Spirit] your friendship with Him will become ever closer, and ever more true.”

“Learn to dialogue with the Lord,” said Pope Benedict, “confide in Him, tell Him your joys and your worries, and ask Him for light and sustenance for your journey.”


The theme of the gathering was 'PUT OUT TO SEA WITH PETER'.



Here is a translation of the Pope's address to the confirmands:

---

Dear boys and girls:

It is a great joy to be able to meet with you during my visit to your city. In this famous football stadium, today you are the protagonists.

I thank your Archbishop, Cardinal Angelo Scola, for his kind words. I thank don Samuel Marelli as well - your friend who has welcomed me in your behalf.

I am happy to greet the episcopal vicars who, in the name of the Archbishop, have administered or will administer Confirmation.

I particularly thank the Fondazione Oratori Milanesi who organized this encounter, your parents, all the catechists, your educators, your godfathers and godmothers, and those who, in each of your parish communities, have been your 'travelling companions' and have given witness to you of their faith in Jesus Christ who died, resurrected, and lives among us.

You, dear children, are preparing to receive the sacrament of Confirmation or have received it recently. I know you have gone through a beautiful formative course, which this year your dicoese called "The miracle of the Spirit".

Helped by this itinerary in various stages, you have learned to recognize the amazing things that the Holy Spirit has done and continues to do in your life and in the lives of all those who say YES to the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

You have discovered the great value of Baptism, the first of the Sacraments, the gateway to Christian life. You received it, thanks to your parents, who along with your godparents, and in your name, professed the Creed and vowed to educate you in the faith.

That has been for you - as it was for me a long time ago! - an immense grace. From that time, reborn in water and the Holy Spirit, you became part of the family of God's children, you became Christians, members of the Church.

Now you have grown up, and you can say your own personal Yes to God, a Yes that is free and aware. The sacrament of the Chrism confirms Baptism, and brings the Holy Spirit abundantly to you.

You yourselves, filled with gratitude, now have the chance to welcome the great gifts of the Spirit which will help you, in the journey of life, to become faithful and courageous witnesses to Jesus.

The gifts of the Holy Spirit are wonderful realities which allow you to be formed as Christians, to live the Gospel and be active members of the community. Remember briefly these gifts, of which first the prophet Isaiah and then Jesus himself spoke:

- The first gift is wisdom, which makes you discover how good and great the Lord is, and as the Word says, makes your life full of flavor, because you are, as Jesus said, the 'salt of the earth'.

- Then the gift of intellect, so that you can understand deeply the Word of God and the truth of the faith.

- The gift of counsel, which will guide you in the discovery of God's plan for your life, the life of each and everyone.

- The gift of strength, to conquer the temptations of evil and to always do good, even when it means sacrifice.

- Then comes the gift of science - not in the technical sense as it is taught in the university - but in the deeper sense, as that which teaches us to find in creation the signs of God, the traces by which God has spoken in every time, of how he speaks to me, to each of us; and how to animate the work of every day with the Gospel, to understand that there is a depth in our work, to understand this depth itself and thus give flavor to work, even difficult work.

- Mercy is another gift, which keeps alive the flame of love in our heart for our Father who is in heaven, so we can pray to him daily with the confidence and loving tenderness of children who are loved, in order not to forget the fundamental reality of the world and your own life - that God exists and God knows me and awaits my response to his plan for me.

- And finally, the seventh and last gift is fear of God. Fear of God does not mean being afraid of him, but to feel for him a profound respect, respect for the will of God which is the true design for my life, and the way through which personal as well as communitarian life can be good; and today, with all the crises in the world, we see how important it is to that everyone respects this will of God which is impressed in our hearts and according to which we must live. Thus, fear of God is the desire to do good, to do what is true, to do the will of God.

Dear boys and girls, all of Christian life is a journey - it is like going along a path that climbs a mountain - therefore, it is not always easy, but climbing a mountain is a beautiful thing, in the company of Jesus. With these precious gifts, your friendship with him becomes even truer and closer.

That friendship is continuously nourished by the sacrament of Eucharist, in which we receive his Body and Blood. That is why I invite you to always take part with joy and faithfulness in Sunday Mass, when the whole community gathers together to pray, to listen to the Word of God, and take part in the Eucharistic Sacrifice.

Therefore, always avail of the Sacrament of Penitence, of confession. It is an encounter with Jesus who pardons our sins and helps us to fulfill what is good. To receive this gift, to start anew, is a great gift in life - to know that I am free, that I can start anew, that everything has been forgiven.

And do not miss your daily personal prayer - learn to dialog with the Lord, trust him, tell him your joys and your concerns, and ask for light and support during your journey of life.

Dear friends, you are fortunate because in your parishes, there are oratories, a great gift in the diocese of Milan. The oratory, as the word says, is a place where one prays, but also a place where you gather together in the joy of the faith, you learn catechesis, you play, you organize activities for service and other purposes, and I would say, where you learn to live. So be frequent and assiduous users of your oratory so that you may increasingly ripen in your knowledge of Jesus and in following him.

The seven gifts of the Holy Spirit grow precisely in such a community where life in the truth, with God, is the practice. In your families, be obedient to your parents, listen to the instructions they give you, so that like Jesus, you may "grow in wisdom, age and grace before God and men" (Lk 2,51-52).

Finally, do not be lazy, but children and youth who are committed, especially to your studies, with a view to your future life - it is your daily duty and a great opportunity for you to grow and to prepare your future.

Be there for others, and be generous, conquering the temptation to place yourself in the center, because selfishness is the enemy of true joy. Once you enjoy the beauty of being part of the community of Jesus, you can make your own contribution to make it grow and you will know how to invite others to be part of it.

Allow me to tell you also that the Lord - every day, today - calls you to great things. Be open to what he suggests to you, and if he asks you to follow him in priesthood or in the consecrated life, do not say No to him! It would be a mistake of laziness. Jesus will fill your heart for all your life.

Dear boys and girls, I tell you this, with particular force: Keep to high ideals - all of them can be held to high measure, not just some. Be saints! But is it possible to be saints at your age? I tell you, of course! St. Ambrose said so himself, the great saint of your city, where he writes in one of his works: "Every age is mature for Christ" (De virginitate, 40).

Above all, this has been shown by many saints who were your age, like Domenico Savio or Maria Goretti. Holiness is the normal way of the Christian - it is not reserved for a few chosen ones, but open to everyone, of course, with the light and the power of the Holy Spirit who will not fail us if we hold out our hands and open our hearts. And with the guidance of our Mother.

Who is our Mother? She is the Mother of Jesus, Mary. To her, Jesus entrusted everyone, before he died on the Cross. May the Virgin Mary always safeguard the beauty of your Yes to Jesus, her Son, the great and faithful friend in your life. So be it.[DIM]

---

Sorry, I have yet to adapt my CEI banner to reflect the change in Popes.

'Bagnasco will continue to lead Italian bishops for another four years'- Now, there's a strange headline! Considering that the cardinal was reappointed just last year by Benedict XVI for a second five-year term as president of the Italian bishops' conference. It would have been genuine news if Pope Francis had rescinded the nomination and decided that now was the time to put into effect his announced view that the president of the Italian bishops' conference (CEI) should henceforth be elected by the bishops of Italy, just as in other countries. Italy has always been an exception in that the Pope, as Primate of Italy, names the CEI president.


Bagnasco will continue
to lead Italian bishops
for another four years
by Marco Ansaldo
Translated from

April 28, 2013


Left photo, Cardinal Bagnasco meeting with Pope Francis on Saturday, and right, his last meeting with Pope Benedict XVI in February, when he led the bishops of Liguria on their ad-limina visit.

Cardinal Angelo Bagnasco will serve the rest of his five-year term as president of the Italian bishops' conference (CEI), and perhaps after that, the way will be open for the direct election of the next CEI president by the bishops themselves.

The communique after the first meeting between Pope Francis and the primate of Italy [Now, how could the Vaticanista of Repubblica make such an error? The CEI president may be primus inter pares among the Italian bishops but the Primate of Italy is the Bishop of Rome. Just as the Primate of the national church in the countries that do have national primates is not necessarily the president of the national bishops' conference, which is a bureaucratic position, not an apostolic title.]

The communique makes no reference to the reform that Papa Bergoglio has in mind for the method of choosing the CEI president But it is known that the Pope has spoken about introducing the direct election of the CEI president as opposed to the present practice of nomination by the Pope.

A source at the CEI said, "Bagnasco will finish his second mandate which ends in 2017. But it is possible the Pope will introduce a change", although already, the choice of the CEI head has taken place after consultations with all the Italian bishops, the results of which are taken into account by the Pope in his final choice.

[In 2007, when Cardinal Camillo Ruini ended three terms as CEI president and retired, the then Apostolic Nuncio in Italy (now Archbishop of Palermo, Cardinal Paolo Romeo) even conducted a controversial informal survey of the Italian bishops for the purpose of determining their ideas on Ruini's successor. Benedict ended up choosing Cardinal Bagnasco (then the new Archbishop of Genoa succeeding Cardinal Bertone when the latter became Secretary of State), over a far less prominent bishop from southern Italy who, the media claimed, Cardinal Bertone endorsed because he felt he could use him to take control of the Italian bishops. In fact, Bertone's first letter to Cardinal Bagnasco upon the latter's being named CEI president was to tell him that henceforth, it would be the task of the Secretariat of State to deal with the government of Italy on all things affecting the Church in Italy.

With the tacit approval of Benedict XVI, Bagnasco pointedly ignored Bertone's attempt which would have arrogated a specific function assigned to the CEI by the 1984 amendments to the Lateran Pacts. Under those amendments, the CEI is also the direct recipient of the annual 0.008% of Italian tax revenue that goes to the Catholic Church in Italy as ongoing restitution by the State of Italy for the confiscation of Church properties and assets from the former papal states in Italy at the time of Italian reunification in 1860. The letter to Bagnasco was widely reported at the time, being the first of Cardinal Bertone's ill-judged initiatives as Secretary of State. To his credit, Bertone did not further push the initiative. ]

So, Bagnasco's first meeting with the new Pope took place with this background. Pope Francis confirmed that he will take part in the CEI's general assembly on May 20-24, and asked to be informed about the important themes to be discussed.

He also reportedly warned against 'wasteful efforts' by a 'multiplication of organisms which ultimately end up uselessly weighing down the work of the CEI'.

Bagnasco told newsmen afterwards, "I felt great sympathy along with a great capacity for listening and attentiveness on the part of the Pope. For my part, I conveyed to him the affection of the Church and the faithful in Italy".

Monday, April 29, Fifth Week in Easter
MEMORIAL OF ST. CATHERINE OF SIENA

Third from left: The Mystical Marriage of Catherine, Giovanni da Paolo, 1470; third from right, the head of St. Catherine in Siena's Basilica di San Domenico.
ST. CATERINA DA SIENA (Italy, 1347-1380), Virgin, Dominican lay sister, Mystic, Doctor of the Church
Caterina Benincasa was born the 23rd child of a Tuscan wool merchant, with a twin sister who died in infancy. At age 6, she told about seeing Jesus in a vision, the first of her lifelong mystical experiences, and at age 7, she vowed herself to chastity. Despite pressure from her family to marry, she joined the Dominican Third Order and lived the next three years of her life in seclusion but through her letters encouraging others in their spiritual life, she gathered an active apostolate around her. Her self-mortification to the extreme was well-known, and towards the end of her life, lived only on Communion. Early on, she started to wear a steel chain around her waist, with which she would beat herself three times a day, once for Christ, once for the living, and once for the dead. In 1366, she told her confessor she had entered into a 'mystical marriage' with Christ, who urged her to leave her private life and work in public. With her sister Dominicans, she travelled through the region advocating clergy reform and spiritual renewal, where she also gained renown for performing miracles of healing. She became interested in public affairs and started to exchange letters with public figures, including, famously, two Popes. (Her expression 'dolce Cristo in terra' for the Pope has become immortal, and was particularly dear to San Jose Maria Escriva, the founder of Opus Dei). When the Great Western Schism began in 1378 that led to two and sometimes even three rival Popes at a time, she travelled to Avignon and convinced Gregory VI to return to Rome. When he died, she supported the cause of his successor Urban VI and went to Rome at his invitation to serve at the Vatican. She died at the age of 33, ostensibly from failure to eat. More than 300 of her letters survive, along with her main work, The Dialogues of Divine Providence in which she recreates her own conversations with God. In 1375, she is believed to have received the stigmata in Pisa, but these only became visible on her death. Her remains are venerated in the Church of Santa Minerva in Rome, but about ten years after she died, her native city of Siena was able to take possession of her incorrupt head, and when it came home to Siena, her own mother was still alive to take part in the procession that installed the relic in the Basilica of San Domenico. The Benincasa house in Siena was kept intact and is now a shrine to the saint. In 1939, Pius XII declared her and St. Francis of Assisi as co-patrons of Italy; in 1970, Paul VI proclaimed her and St. Teresa of Avila as the first woman Doctors of the Church, and in 1999, John Paul II made her one of the Patrons of Europe. Notably, the Bishop of London made reference to the feast day of St. Caterina at the 2012 wedding ceremony of the UK's Prince William to Catherine Middleton. Benedict XVI dedicated his catechesis on 1/26/11 to the saint: www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2011/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20110126...
Readings from today's Mass: www.usccb.org/bible/readings/042913.cfm


AT THE VATICAN TODAY

Pope Francis met with

- Cardinal Zenon Grocholeswki, Prefect of the Congregation for Catholic Education (Institutes of Studies)

- Archbishop Nikola Eterović, Secretary-General of the Bishops' Synod

- Archbishop Ettore Balestrero, named by Benedict XVI Apostolic Nuncio to Colombia last October,
with his family.

= Archbishop Michael W. Banach, Apostolic Nuncio to Papua New Guinea, with his family.

- Archbishop Brian Udaigwe, Apostolic Nuncio to Benin, with his family.




One year ago ...
Benedict XVI ordained nine new Roman priests on Good Shepherd Sunday, which is also the World Day of Prayer for Vocations. At the Regina caeli prayers afterwards, he called attention to the beatification that day at the Basilica of St. Paul outside the Walls of Giuseppe Toniolo, father of 7, Italian economist and sociologist, whose life straddled the 19th and 20th centuries, and who put
into practice the principles of Leo XIII's social encyclical Rerum Novarum. Also beatified that day was Pierre-Adrien Toulorge, an exemplary 18th century priest who was martyred during the Reign of Terror, in his hometown of Coutances, France.

- In Nairobi, Kenya, new attacks against Christians in Africa where one person was killed and ten wounded, four seriously, when a grenade was thrown at a Catholic church, even as police sources in Lagos have reported that twenty people died in an attack in Nigeria.

The Vatican condemned the attacks. In Kenya, they were blamed on the Al-Qaeda affiliate Al=Shabaab based in Somalia, and in Kenya, on an indigenous Islamic terrorist group Boko Haram, which wants to introduce strict Sharia law in the country.

Inasmuch as I already used Benedict XVI's homily and Regina caeli reflection on Good Shepherd Sunday 2012 when we observed it earlier this month, I am using a not insignificant omnibus post on the 'pro multis' controversy that continues over the words used by Jesus at the Last Supper. Recently, the Austrian bishops announced they would continue to translate 'pro multis' as 'for all; and not 'for many' in their German translation of the words of the Consecration.



“For you and for many”

April 28, 2012

What did the Pope do while he was in Castel Gandolfo during the week after Easter? He put pen to paper and, writing in his native language, composed a very important letter which he addressed to the German bishops.

The letter, which was released a few days later, refers to the way in which the words of the Consecration of the chalice of the Lord’s sacred Blood are translated during the Mass. He favours the translation “for many” – which is more faithful to the Biblical text – to the translation “for all,” a [post-Vatican II] modification of the Biblical translation which was intended to underscore the universality of the salvation which was brought about by Christ.

Some will say that this distinction can only be appreciated by specialists. However, understanding this distinction helps to clarify what the Pope considers to be truly important, and the spiritual point of view from which he approaches it.

The words which are used for the institution of the Eucharist are fundamentally important for Pope Benedict, because these words lie at the heart of the Church.

By saying “for many,” Jesus is saying that he is the Servant of Yahweh who was foretold by the prophet Isaiah. When we say “for many,” therefore, we both express our fidelity to the word of Jesus, and recognize Jesus’s fidelity to the words of the Scripture.

There is no doubt that Jesus died so that everyone might be saved. This, along with the profound significance of the words that are used for the institution of the Eucharist, should be explained to the faithful through the use of solid catechesis.

When the Lord offers himself “for you and for many,” we become directly involved and, in gratitude, we take on the responsibility for the salvation which is promised to everyone.

The Holy Father – who has already touched upon this in his book about Jesus – is providing here profound and insightful catechesis about some of the most important words in the Christian Faith.

The Pope concludes by saying that, in this Year of Faith, we must proceed with love and respect for the Word of God, reflecting on its profound theological and spiritual significance so that we might experience the Eucharist with greater depth. We hope to do so indeed.



The new English translation of the Roman Missal which has been in use since fall of 2011 already uses the translation 'for many' for 'pro multis'. However, it must be noted that as early as 2006, the Vatican Congregation for Divine Worship, then under Cardinal Arinze, already informed all the bishops of the world that 'pro multis' must be translated in their respective languages as 'for many', not 'for all' (which would be 'pro omnibus' in Latin, a formulation the Church has never used in the words of the Consecration). Here is a news item on that 2006 notification:

---

'Pro multis' means 'for many',
Vatican tells bishops preparing
new Missal translations


VATICAN CITY, Nov, 18, 2006 (cwn) - The Vatican has ruled that the phrase translationspro multis should be rendered as "for many" in all new translations of the Eucharistic Prayer.

Although "for many" is the literal translation of the Latin phrase, the translations currently in use render the phrase as "for all." Equivalent translations (für alle; por todos; per tutti) are in use in several other languages.

Cardinal Francis Arinze, the prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship, has written to the heads of world's episcopal conferences, informing them of the Vatican decision. For the countries where a change in translation will be required, the cardinal's letter directs the bishops to prepare for the introduction of a new translation of the phrase in approved liturgical texts "in the next one or two years."

The translation of pro multis has been the subject of considerable debate because of the serious theological issues involved. The phrase occurs when the priest consecrates the wine, saying (in the current translation): "...It will be shed for you and for all so that sins may be forgiven".

The Latin version of the Missal, which sets the norm for the Roman liturgy, says: "...qui pro vobis et pro multis effundetur in remissionem peccatorum".

Critics of the current translation have argued, since it first appeared, that rendering pro multis as "for all" not only distorts the meaning of the Latin original, but also conveys the impression that all men are saved, regardless of their relationship with Christ and his Church. The more natural translation, "for many," more accurately suggests that while Christ's redemptive suffering makes salvation available to all, it does not follow that all men are saved.

Cardinal Arinze, in his letter to the presidents of episcopal conferences, explains the reasons for the Vatican's decision:

- The Synoptic Gospels (Mt 26,28; Mk 14,24) make specific reference to “many” for whom the Lord is offering the Sacrifice, and this wording has been emphasized by some biblical scholars in connection with the words of the prophet Isaiah (53, 11-12).

It would have been entirely possible in the Gospel texts to have said “for all” (for example, cf. Luke 12,41); instead, the formula given in the institution narrative is “for many”, and the words have been faithfully translated thus in most modern biblical versions.

- The Roman Rite in Latin has always said pro multis and never pro omnibus in the consecration of the wine.

- The anaphoras [Eucharistic Prayer] of the various Oriental Rites, whether in Greek, Syriac, Armenian, the Slavic languages, etc., contain the verbal equivalent of the Latin pro multis in their respective languages.

- “For many” is a faithful translation of pro multis, whereas “for all” attempts a wider context that belongs more properly to catechesis, not to the liturgy.

- The expression “for many”, while remaining open to the inclusion of each human person, is reflective also of the fact that this salvation is not brought about in some mechanistic, authomatic way, without one’s willing or participation.

Rather, the believer is invited to accept in faith the gift that is being offered and to receive the supernatural life that is given to those who participate in this mystery, living it out in their lives as well so as to be numbered among the “many” to whom the text refers.

- In line with the instruction Liturgiam Authenticam, efforts should be made to be more faithful to the Latin texts found in the so-called typical editions of the Roman Missal, on which all translations are based.

---

I have not had the time to translate the Holy Father's letter to the German bishops as it is only available in German... However, here is a translation of the brief statement by Mons. Roberto Zollitsch, Archbishop of Freiburg and president of the German bishops' conference (DBK) at the time that the DBK published the Holy Father's letter:



Statement on the Holy Father's
letter to German bishops

Archbishop Zoillitsch issued this statement regarding the Holy Father's letter dated April 14, 2012, on the subject of the proper translation of the words said at the Consdecration of the wine at Holy Mass:

---

The new translation of the Missal that is under preparation follows the bases laid down by the Vatican document Liturgiam authenticamin 2001. It provided, among other things, for the proper translation of the words said at the consecration of the wine, about which there had been much discussion in the past.

The Holy Father now has expressed himself on this issue in a letter to German-speaking bishops. The letter offers an explanation and puts an end to the discussion.

The letter presents with careful argumentations why the Pope desires the words to be translated as previously directed by him [through the 2006 instruction from Cardinal Arinze cited earlier in the post].

The letter is a sort of catechesis on the correct understanding of the words said at the Consecration. It also fully clarifies the theological premises and the content of the translation that we must prepare.

The letter is an important impetus for the German bishops to proceed rapidly with our translation [of the Missal]. The detailed propositions of the Holy Father are also a valuable contribution to understanding the redemptive action of Jesus Christ "in order that the universality of the salvation he brings may be expressed unmistakably in the sense that Jesus meant" (Benedict XVI).

---

Another belated 'milestone marker' article in the Italian media this time last year displays all the biases and disinformation that MSM has fostered about Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI over the years...




The subtitle of this article, "The media image of the Pope has changed much in the past seven years" and its introductory paragraph give a misleadingly positive view of what the journalists interviewed had to say about Benedict XVI - in part because Mora who put it all together, chose to pick out only the positive things that the newsmen had to say about Benedict XVI for his introduction.

But alas, their overall view is largely negative, and despite their demurrals - mostly for show, it seems - and virtually unchanged from all their prejudice-bound perceptions seven years ago. Some perceptions are even appalling... Believe me, not one of those interviewed below, except perhaps the lady from ANSA, began with "that attitude of good will without which there is no understanding" that Joseph Ratzinger humbly asked of his readers in the Preface to Volume I of JESUS OF NAZARETH... And that is why I chose the banners I used for this post!

Benedict XVI in the eyes
of those who cover the Vatican
The media image of the Pope has
changed much in the past 7 years
by H. Sergio Mora
Translated from the Italian service of


VATICAN CITY, April 24 ZENIT.org) - From initial suspicion in the media to great interest today, Benedict XVI is a Pope whose image in the media has improved remarkably.

From someone who was initially seen by the media as the 'Panzerkardinal' and the 'rottweiler of the faith', he is now
seen for what he really is:

S kind and humble intellectual who has learned to be comfortable with crowds and has endeared himself to the faithful.

A reformer who has never lost sight of his principal mission: to announce Christ to the world, and bring Catholics closer to their Church.

A Pope who has Faced openly the Church's most critical problems from the frontlines, most notably that of the various crises caused by sex-offending priests and the bishops who covered up for them, in the process making many enemies.

ZENIT spoke to some of the journalists who have been covering the Vatican and have followed Benedict XVI's Pontificate,

Giovanna Chirri, Vaticanista of the Italian news agency ANSA:

---

This Pope is a theologian who has become a reformer but has never lost sight of his mission: to announce Christ to the world. He found himself heir to quite a few problems - just think of the priest pedophiles and the Vatican financial system - but he has always acted with decision.

There has been no lack of communications difficulties and information leaks, but he has intervened in all such problems insofar as he is able to.

In all his homilies in recent days and during Holy Week, it seemed obvious to me that his principal objective is to spread the faith and to do it in such a way that all Catholics may be capable of announcing Christ.

---

Frédéric Mounier, Rome correspondent of the French Catholic daily, La Croix:

---

In Rome, I found a reality about Benedict XVI that is different from his image in France. This Pope is not a Panzerkardinal, but a humble intellectual, who is very attentive about listening to others.

But I fear that his positions are not much listened to today because they do not fit the usual rules of media communication - he speaks in depth, and he is an intellectual. He takes the time to think out his positions, which are not based on emotion. So his thoughts are very interesting but far from the capacity of ordinary folk to listen. I think this is a great challenge to his Pontificate.

---

What on earth is Mounier saying? Has he listened to the Pope's catecheses, his Angelus mini-homilies, his messages and addresses to young people and children, and even his major homilies, at all? The Pope never condescends to his listeners - much less, insult them as Mounier does in saying that ordinary folk do not have the capacity to listen to the Pope's words - by talking down to them in any way. Rather, he manages to speak in a way that brings them almost effortlessly to the level of understanding the concepts he presents.

People like Mounier often tend to forget - if they ever bothered to inform themselves, to begin with - that Joseph Ratzinger spent a quarter-century teaching young university students, with such communicative powers that his lectures - delivered without notes - were attended by students who were not even registered in his classes and even by outsiders drawn by his early fame as a spellbinding lecturer. They called him Goldmund even then ('golden mouth', Chrysostom in the Greek form) for his mastery of communicating knowledge, even if he was always soft-spoken and never a Ciceronean orator. In the same way, people came expressly to listen to his homilies when he was Archbishop of Munich.

Yet even the best Vaticanistas have never seemed to factor in this overwhelming reputation that Joseph Ratzinger had as a master communicator long before he came to Rome. If they had, they ought not to have been too surprised that he has been attracting more audiences to the Vatican than even the wildly popular John Paul II.

Did Mounier ever stop to consider why - or was he even aware of it - documents like the first two encyclicals and Sacramentum caritatis were almost instant million-copy sellers in Italy alone? When did papal texts like this ever become best-sellers with the 'common folk'? (Italy does not have a million intellectuals.) Or, is he even aware that the Vatican publishing house is thriving on its mass-publication Benedict booklets that compile his thoughts on various spiritual topics (the Benedetto XVI Pensieri series of which there are at least two dozen titles by now?

Benedict XVI proves, among all the leading personalities in the world today, that if you have something to say that corresponds to what people seek, they will come to hear you and will buy your books. So Mr. Mounier, do your homework on Joseph Ratzinger, and then drop into a LEV bookstore - there are two off St. Peter's Square - and sample those two-euro booklets on Benedict's thoughts. Fortunately, for all of us, there are other sources of information other than just the MSM.]

Salvatore Izzo, Vaticanista of the Italian news agency AGI

---

Benedict XVI is acquiring a paternal image that initially he did not have. It's like someone who has been used to live alone in a condominium where he may perhaps find all the various ambient noises irritating, until he has children himself, and everything changes.

He has been working mightily to bring all Catholics close to the Church - not just the traditionalists but also the more innovative ecclesial movements. It may not be obvious to everyone, but that's how it is.

---

[Frankly, I was taken aback by the near-banality of these comments by Izzo, because I find him, by far, the most diligent and productive of all those reporting on the Pope daily; more importantly, he does so with the right attitude towards the Pope and the Church, an unabashed 'sentire cum Ecclesia'

Patricia K. Thomas of Associated Press Television News:

---

As a journalist, I see him up close, one might say, and I think he has changed since the start of his Pontificate because he is a humble man who is always ready to listen. [So how exactly has he changed? He was always humble and a good listener!]

If you ask me how Americans see him, I will say that these days, because of the Vatican's decision about a group of US sisters, I can say that there is an anger against him and the Vaticvan that many are venting on the Internet. [So, Patricia, have you been able to quantify whatever is posted on the Internet to make the general statement that 'there is an anger against him and the Vatican'? Aren't you just projecting the AP world-view?]
Those who do not go to Mass believe that the Pope wants to return the Church to the past, that he listens more to the Lefebvrians than to the American sisters. [Those who think so are uninformed bigots who simply take their cues from what media like AP tell them.]

When he went to the United States he spoke against pedophilia [and presumably gained a lot of approval], but now there is a crescendo of hostility.

---

[There you go again, speaking as though you had a built-in sensor that enables you to poll all Americans instantly on any subject you can think of, so you can state your own opinions as a general statement applying to all Americans. How many of them - with all the economic woes besetting them - would even bother to think about those sisters now feigning to be 'victims' when they have been the doctrinal aggressors lo these past 40 years!... And one should remind Ms Thomas that bad poll numbers - real ones, not imagined - mean absolutely nothing to the Pope, who is not running for Mr. Congeniality. ]

Juan Lara of the Spanish news agency EFE:

---

I have always had more or less the same perception of Benedict XVI because I have always followed Vatican news, but there certainly has been a change. In the sense that initially, he was seen as a person who was too serious, orthodox, conservative.

But he has shown himself to be very amiable, and someone who has proposed a rather advanced social Magisterium.

Then there is the significant fact that the issue over scandals caused by misbehaving priests came to a head in his Pontificate, and that he confronted it head-on, and has proceeded to clean house. It is very important that he did so from the frontlines himself.

---

Maarten Lulof van Aalderen, correspondent of the Dutch newspaper De Telegraaf:

---

The perception that people had of Benedict XVI from the start has not changed at all. From the media point of view, he was a professor-Pope - that was the idea, and it has remained. [This man is not saying anything! He is a professor-Pope, among many other things that he is. But what exactly is the MSM idea - Van Aalderen's idea - of a 'professor-Pope'? Is that supposed to be a black mark? ]

This is a Pope who still finds it difficult to communicate with the people. He has not managed to resolve this problem at all!

---

[Another ignoramus who should go the head of the class with Mounier, wearing the dunce cap. People like them are either genuinely ignorant about the Pope's long career before he came to Rome, or are deliberately wearing blinders so as not to have to change the idee fixe they have about him. They do not even try to mask their obvious biases and a priori judgments, which they should be able to submerge if they were genuine journalists. But this is how they perpetrate their black myths. If you say something often enough, no matter how false or outrageous, the public will end up accepting your lies as fact.]

Elisabetta Piqué, correspondent in Italy for the Argentine daily La Nacion:

---

Benedict XVI, without having the charisma of John Paul II, has succeeded to loosen up a bit in public. Originally, he did not dare touch anyone, but now he takes children into his arms and kisses them. [I do not remember that he ever did not dare touch anyone! When he went to his old apartment the afternoon after his election as Pope, he touched everyone who held out their hands to him. And he started kissing babies the first time he walked down the central aisle of St. John Lateran, where he celebrated his first Mass as Pope before he did that in St. Peter's Basilica... Creating false memories' is another manifestation of journalist bias - they invent memories and state them as fact to support some false assertion they make.]

I think he has learned to manage himself in front of crowds. [Gee, you think? A man who strikes almost everyone who gets to meet him as extremely refined would need to 'learn to manage himself in front of crowds'? What is he - a spastic or a brutish boor?]

He has learned to endear himself to people wherever he goes. [This woman's condescension is boundless! Can anyone really 'learn to endear himself' to others, and if he does, isn't he then a hypocrite? You are either endearing because that is your nature, not because you want to be, or you can take on a persona meant to be endearing, as manipulative politicians like Obama do, which makes them prime hypocrites!]

Consider his last apostolic visit. I have been to Cuba before, where almost no one goes to Mass. And yet he managed to make himself liked. Not to speak of Mexico.

When he was elected Pope, he had the image of the Rottweiler, of the Grand Inquisitor. But instead he has shown himself to be very amiable, and while he is an intellectual, he is also very humble. Everytime the Vatican has made a communications error, he has always acknowledged it.

---

[Oy veh, Elisabetta! Did you just become Ms Hyde after being Dr. Jekyll? I think this kind of schizophrenia tends to overtake those who have a less constitutional resistance to reality and are therefore able to make some concession to fact.]

Andres Beltramo, Vaticanista of the Mexican news agency Notimex:

---

I think he has changed, but even the perception about him has changed. Starting with the fact that he has now travelled to many countries, and this has accelerated the change of perception.

In his last trip, for instance, he was not known for the most part. Especially because he had remained in the shadow of John Paul II, and there was a great question mark about his person. [That's Beltramo's personal perception - because that's not at all the attitude so raucously and enthusiastically demonstrated by all the Mexican groups present at every General Audience and Angelus at the Vatican or Castel Gandolfo, who are certainly not cheering the shadow of somebody!]

But when they [the Mexicans] were exposed to him directly, there was a change of attitude. [Is Beltramo saying that all those hundreds of thousands who turned up to welcome Bdenedict XVI in Leon simply turned up and spent hours waiting for him - this shadow of somebody - without knowing anything about him? Whatever 'change of attitude' Beltramo imagines, it certainly was not from utter lack of interest for someone they did not know or care to know, to love at first sight! It had to start from a healthy interest and curiosity in a Pope - after all, there have only been 265 throughout history - and the veneration for the Pope that is ingrained in cradle Catholics. And then, the actual physical sight of him turned all that interest, curiosity and veneration into a personal bond that was collectively felt. The very same 'mechanism' that had caused the Mexicans to develop a special affinity to John Paul II, caused them now to feel a similar affinity to Benedict XVI.]

Of course, the media had written and spoken about him, perhaps critically, which was reflected in the public attitude, but the effect was temporary. What sticks more is what the people feel after seeing the Pope personally, and so they are left with a perception quite unlike what the media have told them. [All the more reason they wouldn't have turned up in such massive numbers in Leon for his arrival, if they had swallowed whatever negative images the media had conjured up for them earlier!]

---

Alessandro Speciale, Vatican correspondent for UCA News, Religion News Service and Vatican Insider:

---

Benedict XVI found himself facing a challenge and a crisis that he had never imagined he would have to build his Pontificate on - the sexual abused crisis.

But he was able to respond in a way that measured up to the great demands of the circumstances - something which not many persons within the Church hierarchy would have been able to do, and would simply have dismissed it by saying "The world is attacking the Church".

But this Pope is aware that it was an evil within the Church that must be extirpated. Perhaps he may not have wished that the early years of his Pontificate had not been focused on this, but in the eyes of the world, this is what has marked his Pontificate so far. It is a challenge he was not expecting but to which he has responded adequately.

---

Call me unduly prickly and intolerant of reporters who are not comme il faut, but isn't Speciale being rather naive about this? He speaks as though Benedict XVI, alone among all the Church hierarchy, had not previously done all his homework - since 2001, at least - on this 'filth' within the Church.

He was therefore prepared to act when he had to - but not expecting perhaps the degree and extent of the malevolence that would be directed at him personally, even if he had experienced the 'long Lent' brought on by the eruption of this issue in the USA in 2000-2002. John Paul II was visibly sick by then, and the media spared him the personal scourging they would inflict on his successor less than a decade later.

They spared him the additional agony, despite his apparent obliviousness to the double life of a Marcial Maciel he would publicly praise as a Catholic model as late as 2004! If the media can respect infirmity, why can they not show the same respect for age, especially when, in this case, the man they chose to vilify and blame for every action committed by sex-offender priests and conniving bishops was the only man who had persevered for years in carrying on the burden entrusted to his office of dealing with these cases?]

B16's return to the Vatican
now expected Thursday afternoon

ADNKronos reports that it was told by Fr. Federico Lombardi that emeritus Pope Benedict XVI will be returning to the Vatican from Castel Gandolfo "most likely on Thursday afternoon, May 2". It will be the day after the Feast of St. Joseph as Patron of Laborers, the second of five name days during the year for Joseph Ratzinger (two for St. Joseph, two for St. Benedict, and one for St. Aloysius).

Almost a direct counterpoint to the 2012 'media assessment' of Benedict XVI that I posted as a lookback feature earlier today is this article by Sandro Magister - the third major article in the past several days that seeks a more realistic perspective to the Pope Francis phenomenon, but it also serves to underscore it even more by calling it a 'spell' and recounting more of it....

The spell of Pope Francis
His popularity is to a large extent due to the artfulness with which he speaks.
Everything is forgiven him, even when he says things that if said by others
would be hammered with criticism. But the first protests are beginning to appear.
by Sandro Magister
From the English service of


ROME, April 29, 2013 – A stir has been made, in the media by the critical remark that Pope Francis reserved for the IOR, the Institute for Works of Religion, the controversial Vatican “bank,” in the homily for his morning Mass at the Domus Sanctae Marthae on Wednesday, April 24:

"When the Church wants to throw its weight around and sets up organizations, and sets up offices and becomes a bit bureaucratic, the Church loses its principal substance and runs the risk of turning itself into an NGO. And the Church is not an NGO. It is a love story. . . But there are those guys at the IOR. . . Excuse me, eh?. . . Everything is necessary, the offices are necessary. . . okay, fine! But they are necessary up to a certain point: as s an aid to this love story. But when the organization takes the top spot, love steps down and the Church, poor thing, becomes an NGO. And this is not the way.”

[IMHO, as I remarked at the time it was first reported, it was a cheap shot, a statement inappropriately made during a homily, none of which really applies to the IOR with its 130-something employees. They are bank workers, which is not what the infamously named NGOs (non-governmental organizations) do, a UN nomenclature for legally constituted organizations, usually huge and with multinational sprawl, that are not a part of a government, not conventional for-profit businesses. having wider social aims that have political aspects but are not strictly political parties. The IOR was established to fund the charitable activities of the Pope (it has been contributing between 50-100 million euros yearly for this purpose from the funds generated by its investments of funds deposited in it by Church organizations, dioceses, priests, nuns and religious). It must be underscored once more that for all the media hyperbolic stereotypes denigrating the IOR in the past four decades for perceived 'scandals', its activities in the past two years (since December 2010 when Benedict XVI decreed financial transparency measures at the Vatican) have passed muster with the European Union's watchdog agency.

The only genuine scandal involving the IOR in that period is not financial, but the unceremonious sacking of its former president Ettore Gotti Tedeschi for alleged incompetence, even if he was one of the architects of Benedict XVI's original financial transparency law (later amended by the elements who were responsible for forcing him out of IOR). The only genuine scandal that involved IOR was unfortunately huge and catastrophic: Back in the 1980s when its was the major shareholder in a large Italian bank, Banco Ambrosiano, IOR had to restitute some %250 million to depositors after Ambrosiano collapsed when it could not account for some $3 billion (in current value) of funds managed by its large overseas banking operations. Principally, the Ambrosiano was thought to be used by the Mafia and similar crime organizations to launder money, and the bank was also used to finance various political movements like Somoza and the Sandinistas in Central America, and Solidarity in Poland. The collapse of the bank was followed by the mysterious deaths and assassinations of various figures connected to it.

For now, the remaining question about IOR is that its depositors may include (or included) laymen who have been using the Vatican bank to launder money, a ruse which is no longer possible under the new Moneyval-approved Vatican transparency measures.

Papa Bergoglio delivers these morning homilies completely off-the-cuff. And the passage reproduced above is the literal transcription provided a few hours afterward by Vatican Radio.

But that same day, in reporting on the same homily in another way, "L'Osservatore Romano" left out the aside: “But there are those guys at the IOR. . . Excuse me, eh?”

[NB: A few days before his critical reference to the IOR in the homily of April 24, Pope Francis eliminated the annual stipend of 25,000 euro awarded until 2012 to each of the five cardinals who make up the supervisory board of the Vatican "bank": Tarcisio Bertone, Jean-Louis Tauran, Odilo Pedro Scherer, Telesphore Placidus Toppo, Domenico Calcagno.] [A very laudable gesture, indeed, to do away with a practice that is SOP with secular banks which compensate their various oversight boards, but is definitely unseemly for the 'Vatican bank'. However, I would like to believe that most if not all of the cardinals who have been receiving these stipends since IOR was instituted have not kept the stipends for their own personal use = what would they need an extra 25,000 euro annually, when their day-to-day expenses are already paid for by their respective dioceses, if they are metropolitan bishops; or paid for out of their monthly salaries if they are Curial cardinals who do have the benefit of renting their living quarters from the Vatican itself on special terms - but have given such bonuses to some Church or social cause.]

This disparity between the radio and the newspaper of the Holy See is an indication of the uncertainty that still reigns at the Vatican on what kind of media treatment to give the weekday homilies of the Pope which he delivers at the 7 a.m. Mass, in the chapel of the Santa Marta residence.

To these Masses are admitted a selected public, different each morning. And among those present on April 24 a fair number were employees of the IOR.

[Are Vatican correspondents not 'admitted' to these morning Masses, and can they not make their own audio recordings of the homilies and then release the unfiltered transcripts, as they had been doing with Benedict XVI's inflight Q&As? I would think Magister himself woult

These homilies of the Pope are recorded in their entirety, but the complete texts have not been released. Unlike his official discourses, when any parts improvised off-the-cuff are either not included in the official transcript or 'cleaned up' in thought and expression, then submitted to the Pope for approval before being published.

Only two partial summaries of the daily homilies are provided - by Vatican Radio and by L'Osservatore Romano, redacted independently of one another, and therefore different in their choice of word-for-word citations.

It is not known whether this practice - aimed both at safeguarding the Pope's freedom of speech and at defending him from the risks of improvisation - will be maintained or modified.

The fact is that what becomes known of these semipublic homilies is by now an important part of the oratory typical of Pope Francis.

It is a concise, simple, conversational oratory, tethered to words or images of immediate communicative impact.

For example:
- the image of “God spray,” used by Pope Francis on April 18 to warn against the idea of an impersonal God “that is a bit everywhere but one does not know what it may be”;

- the “babysitter Church,” used on April 17 to stigmatize a Church that only “takes care of children to put them to sleep,” instead of acting as a mother with her children;

- “satellite Christians,” used on April 22 to brand those Christians who allow their conduct to be dictated by “common sense” and by “worldly prudence,” instead of by Jesus.

Stefania Falasca, an old friend of Bergoglio - who telephoned her on the evening of his election - asked him after one morning Mass at the Domus Sanctae Marthae: "Father, how do these expressions come to you?”

“A simple smile was his reply.” In Falasca's judgment, the use of such expressions on the part of the Pope “in literary terms is called 'pastiche,' the juxtaposition of words of different levels or different registers with expressive effect. The 'pastiche' style is today a typical feature of communication on the web and of postmodern language. This is therefore a matter of linguistic associations unprecedented in the history of the Petrine magisterium.”

In an April 23 editorial in the newspaper of the Italian episcopal conference, Avvenire, Falasca compared the oratory of Pope Francis to the "sermo humilis" theorized by St. Augustine.

Papa Bergoglio is also introducing this style into his official homilies and discourses. For example, in the homily for the Chrism Mass of Holy Thursday, in St. Peter's Basilica, he made a very striking exhortation to the pastors of the Church, bishops and priests, to take on “the odor of the sheep.” [I have remarked once before that although very vivid, the imagery is rather condescending to the 'sheep'. And not that we have been reading any concrete examples of prominent cardinals taking the cue.]

Another typical feature of his preaching is interacting with the crowd, getting it to respond in chorus. He did so for the first time and repeatedly at the “Regina Coeli" of Sunday, April 21, for example when he said: “Thank you very much for the greeting, but you should also greet Jesus. Yell 'Jesus' loud!" And the cry of "Jesus" in fact went up from St. Peter's Square.

The popularity of Pope Francis is due to a large extent to this style of preaching and to the easy, widespread success of the concepts on which he insists the most - mercy, forgiveness, the poor, the “peripheries” - seen reflected in his actions and in his own person. [And what then was 'reflected' in the actions and persons of his predecessors - none of the Christian virtues that Pope Francis is reiterating and underscoring in his statements and in the papal 'lifestyle' he has chosen?]

It is a popularity that acts as a screen for the other more inconvenient things that he does not neglect to say - for example, his frequent references to the devil - and that if said by others, would unleash criticism, while for him they are forgiven.

In effect, the media have so far covered up with indulgent silence not only his references to the devil, but also a whole series of other pronouncements on points of doctrine as controversial as they are essential.

On April 12, for example, speaking to the pontifical biblical commission, Pope Francis reiterated that “the interpretation of the Sacred Scriptures cannot be solely an individual scholarly effort, but must always be compared with, inserted within, and authenticated by the living tradition of the Church.”

And therefore “this entails the insufficiency of any interpretation that is subjective or simply limited to an analysis incapable of accommodating within itself that overarching sense which over the course of the centuries has constituted the tradition of the whole people of God.”

This salvo of the Pope against the forms of exegesis prevalent even among Catholic scholars went practically unnoticed, because generally unreported in the media.

On April 19, in his morning homily, he lashed out against the “great ideologists” who want to interpret Jesus in a purely human vein. He called them “intellectuals without talent, ethicists without goodness. And of beauty we will not speak, because they do not understand anything.” In this case as well, silence.

On April 22, in another morning homily, he said forcefully that Jesus is “the only gate” for entering into the Kingdom of God God and “all the other paths are deceptive, they are not true, they are false.”

With this, he therefore reiterated that indispensable truth of the Catholic faith which recognizes in Jesus Christ the only savior of all. But when in August of 2000 John Paul II and Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger published the declaration Dominus Iesus to state this for the Jubilee Year, they [in particular, Cardinal Ratzinger, who signed the declaration] were bitterly contested from inside and outside of the Church. But now that Pope Francis has said the same thing, everybody is quiet.

On April 23, the feast of St. George, in the homily of the Mass with the cardinals in the Pauline Chapel, he said that “the Christian identity is a belonging to the Church, because to find Jesus outside of the Church is not possible.”

And this time as well, silence. And yet the thesis according to which “extra Ecclesiam nulla salus," which he has reaffirmed, has almost always signaled polemics in the past.

This benevolence of the media toward Pope Francis is one of the features that characterize the beginning of this pontificate.

The gentleness with which he is able to speak even the most uncomfortable truths facilitates this benevolence. [And did Benedict XVI speak without gentleness at all? Was that not always one of the characteristics that even his critics conceded? But in his case, the gentleness of his manner and speech did not at all inspire any 'benevolence' (literal meaning, good will) towards him - his statements simply fueled their open malevolence, nurtured through decades of hostility and disapproval not just for him and for his statements but for the Church herself, whose bedrock positions they completely despise and mock.]

But it is easy to predict that sooner or later it will cool down and give way to a reappearance of criticism.

The first warning came after Pope Francis, on April 15, confirmed the strict approach of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in dealing with the Leadership Conference of Women Religious composed of US sisters [who have been proclaiming an openly dissident 'magisterium' of their own for at least three decades]

The protests coming from the sisters and by the “liberal” currents of Catholicism, not only American, sounded like the 'spell' was beginning to break.

[Magister fails to note that even these protests were far more muted than the flood of lethal vitriol unleashed against Benedict XVI last year when the Vatican first announced the findings of the apostolic visitation looking into possible doctrinal and practical transgressions of the LCRW which is by statute under Vatican supervision. In fact, the muted protests also contain the explicit as well as implicit assumption that Francis will think better about the issue and somehow take a more lenient attitude to them. Which betrays the wrong mindset of Catholic dissidents who think that Catholic doctrine allows any 'leniency' of interpretation or application. Especially not with members of religious orders, whose lives are supposed to be consecrated to Christ and service to his Church.]


Not that anyone cares, but in the interest of clarifying my attitude and sentiments towards Pope Francis, I have been asking myself whether, if Joseph Ratzinger had never become Pope, and if Jorge Bergoglio had directly succeeded John Paul II, I would have succumbed to the Francis 'spell', but I can honestly say no. It is never a question of choosing to do so. Nor, even more to the point, would I refer to any Pope's personal appeal as a 'spell' that he casts as though he were a fairy godfather waving a magic wand over those who are susceptible to spells.

Very simply, I had not expected I would ever make again the personal connection I instantly felt with John Paul II the moment he appeared on the loggia of St. Peter's Square in 1978. And yet, incredibly, I did with Joseph Ratzinger, to a degree that was far more profound and life-changing than it ever was with John Paul II.

So my dispassionate attitude towards Pope Francis, for all that I respect, love and pray for him because he is our Pope now, has nothing to do with Jorge Mario Bergoglio, the private person (though I recognize he is a holy man, and a competent, intelligent and dedicated servant of God), but everything with the fact that he is the current Vicar of Christ on earth. The same attitude I had towards the other Popes in my lifetime, from Pius XII through John XXIII to Paul VI (the first Pope I had an occasion to meet up close - I was in awe, of course, but no gush of affection).

I first felt personal affection for a Pope with John Paul I, but the connection with John Paul II was qualitatively different, and that with Benedict XVI was a quantum leap, no less, in the degree and extent of the connection. All this just comes spontaneously, without seeking or choosing it. For me, it didn't happen with Francis.

But not jumping on the Francis bandwagon does not keep me from acknowledging and praising the good things he says and does. As I said from the start, there are and will be more than enough on his bandwagon who are or will be chronicling his pontificate with the same, if not more, love and dedication as those of us who have been expressing our love for Benedict XVI - as Joseph Ratzinger and as Pope - the way we have done over the past eight years.

Tuesday, April 30, Fifth Week of Easter

ST.PIUS V (b Italy 1504, Pope 1566-1572), Dominican, Pope and Confessor
Any first reading of the basic facts about Pius V's life and six-year Papacy is bound to raise the question, why is he not called Pius V the Great? He was a thoroughly holy man who faced great political and ecclesial challenges decisively, beginning with having to implement the epochal Council of Trent (which sat from 1545 and ended in 1563, just three years before he became Pope). What he did in the six years of his papacy, at the peak of the Counter-Reformation, defined the outward identity of the Church for the next 400 years. Born Antonio Ghislieri to a poor family near Turin, he took the name Michele when he became a Dominican friar, distinguishing himself as a professor of theology in Pavia for 16 years. Strongly committed to the defense of the faith, he asked to be named an Inquisitor and caught the attention of Paul IV who made him a cardinal and the Supreme Inquisitor. He was opposed by the next Pope, Pius IV, who deprived him of his office, only to be elected as his successor in 1566 - without the support of any Catholic monarchs, as was usual at the time, but championed by the man many thought would have been elected Pope, the future St. Charles Borromeo, Archbishop of Milan. Pius V inherited a Church that was plagued by corrupt clergy and the immediate consequences of the Protestant Reformation, as well as a Holy Roman Empire under threat from the Turkish armies, and constant bickering among the new nation states of Europe. At the same time, it fell to him to implement the Counter-Reformation measures of the Council of Trent. He established seminaries for the proper formation of priests; he published a Catechism of the Catholic Church during his first year as Pope; he promulgated a standard Roman Missal in 1570 by purging the existing Roman liturgy of non-essential additions over the centuries - a Missal which remained in use, except for minor revisions, until Paul VI's liturgical reform of 1969-70); he revised the breviary for priests; he legislated against clerical abuses; and he served the poor of Rome by using papal funds for banquets to build and fund hospitals instead. He proclaimed Thomas Aquinas a Doctor of the Church and promoted the liturgical music of Palestrina. He dismissed eight French bishops for heresy and declared Elizabeth I of England a heretic. He organized the Catholic states of Europe into the Holy League that defeated the Turks in the 1571 Battle of Lepanto against all odds, a victory he attributed to Our Lady of the Rosary, also called Our Lady of Victory after Lepanto. Interestingly, he helped Malta in its role as an outpost of Christian defense by sending his architect to design the fortifications of La Valletta, the capital. Yet all his life, he kept strictly to the Dominican Rule of prayer, fasting and austerity. Like a previous Dominican Pope, Innocent V, he preferred to wear his white Dominican habit, and ever since, Popes have worn white. Because of his enlightened defense of the faith, he is the patron saint of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. He is buried in the Basilica of Santa Maria Maggiore and was canonized in 1712.
Readings of today's Mass: www.usccb.org/bible/readings/043013.cfm


AT THE VATICAN TODAY

Pope Francis met with
= H.E. Shimon Peres, President of Israel, and his delegation.



One year ago...
- Pope Benedict XVI met with Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke, Prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Segnatura, and the Secretary of the Tribunal, Mons. Frans Daneels, O. Praem.; Mons Jean-Louis Bruguès, O.P., Emeritus Archbishop of Angers (France), Secretary of the Congregation for Catholic Education (Seminaries and Higher Institutes of Study) [He was since appointed by Benedict XVI to be the Holy Roman Librarian-Archivist]; and Mons. Luciano Russo, Apostolic Nuncio to Rwanda, with his family members.

- The Vatican released the text of the Holy Father's message to the President of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences, Prof. Mary Ann Glendon, and to the participants of the Academy's XVIII Plenary Session held in Rome (April 27-May 1) on the theme: "The Global Quest for Tranquillitatis Ordinis: 'Pacem in terris', Fifty Years Later", commemorating the social encyclical by John XXIII.

---

To Her Excellency Professor Mary Ann Glendon
President of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences

I am pleased to greet you and all who have gathered in Rome for the Eighteenth Plenary Session of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences.

You have chosen to mark the fiftieth anniversary of Blessed John XXIII’s Encyclical Letter Pacem in Terris by studying the contribution of this important document to the Church’s social doctrine.

At the height of the Cold War, when the world was still coming to terms with the threat posed by the existence and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, Pope John addressed what has been described as an "open letter to the world".

It was a heartfelt appeal from a great pastor, nearing the end of his life, for the cause of peace and justice to be vigorously promoted at every level of society, nationally and internationally.

While the global political landscape has changed significantly in the intervening half-century, the vision offered by Pope John still has much to teach us as we struggle to face the new challenges for peace and justice in the post-Cold-War era, amid the continuing proliferation of armaments.

"The world will never be the dwelling-place of peace, till peace has found a home in the heart of each and every human person, till all preserve within themselves the order ordained by God to be preserved" (Pacem in Terris, 165).

At the heart of the Church’s social doctrine is the anthropology which recognizes in the human creature the image of the Creator, endowed with intelligence and freedom, capable of knowing and loving.

Peace and justice are fruits of the right order that is inscribed within creation itself, written on human hearts (cf. Rom 2:15) and therefore accessible to all people of good will, all "pilgrims of truth and of peace".

Pope John’s Encyclical was and is a powerful summons to engage in that creative dialogue between the Church and the world, between believers and non-believers, which the Second Vatican Council set out to promote.

It offers a thoroughly Christian vision of man’s place in the cosmos, confident that in so doing it is holding out a message of hope to a world that is hungry for it, a message that can resonate with people of all beliefs and none, because its truth is accessible to all.

In that same spirit, after the terrorist attacks that shook the world in September 2001, Blessed John Paul II insisted that there can be "no peace without justice, no justice without forgiveness"[/G](Message for the 2002 World Day of Peace).

The notion of forgiveness needs to find its way into international discourse on conflict resolution, so as to transform the sterile language of mutual recrimination which leads nowhere. If the human creature is made in the image of God, a God of justice who is "rich in mercy" (Eph 2:4), then these qualities need to be reflected in the conduct of human affairs.

It is the combination of justice and forgiveness, of justice and grace, which lies at the heart of the divine response to human wrong-doing (cf. Spe Salvi, 44), at the heart, in other words, of the "divinely established order" (Pacem in Terris, 1).

Forgiveness is not a denial of wrong-doing, but a participation in the healing and transforming love of God which reconciles and restores.

How eloquent, then, was the choice of theme for the 2009 Special Assembly for Africa of the Synod of Bishops: "The Church in Africa at the Service of Reconciliation, Justice and Peace". The life-giving message of the Gospel has brought hope to millions of Africans, helping them to rise above the sufferings inflicted on them by repressive regimes and fratricidal conflicts.

Similarly, the 2010 Assembly on the Church in the Middle East highlighted the themes of communion and witness, the oneness of mind and soul that characterizes those who set out to follow the light of truth.

Historic wrongs and injustices can only be overcome if men and women are inspired by a message of healing and hope, a message that offers a way forward, out of the impasse that so often locks people and nations into a vicious circle of violence.

Since 1963, some of the conflicts that seemed insoluble at the time have passed into history. Let us take heart, then, as we struggle for peace and justice in the world today, confident that our common pursuit of the divinely established order, of a world where the dignity of every human person is accorded the respect that is due, can and will bear fruit.

I commend your deliberations to the maternal guidance of Our Lady, Queen of Peace. To you, to Bishop Sánchez Sorondo, and to all the participants in the XVIII Plenary Session, I gladly impart my Apostolic Blessing.

From the Vatican
27 April 2012

---

Yet another great example of how Benedict XVI hardly ever makes any 'routine' messages. To advocate 'justice with forgiveness' in resolving international conflicts is absolutely revolutionary from the secular point of view, but it is the most natural way - the only way - in Christian praxis. This is why the Pope has been calling on lay Catholics to engage in politics and public service, thereby helping to promote Christian principles in the public sphere and legislation that concretely affects the entire citizenry. One might extrapolate this to the legal sphere as more and more, international courts created by the UN and the European Union are getting to decide matters affecting all citizens in their jurisdiction.

4/30/2013 Tomorrow marks the second anniversary of the beatification of John Paul II, and since it looks as if he may be canonized in October after medical attestation earlier this month of a miracle cure (no details known so far) attributed to him after his beatification, doubtless, he will be the focus of media reporting and commentary about the Church and the papacy tomorrow. So I would like to re-post today two items that surfaced around this time in 2011...



4/30/12
Apropos Benedict XVI's recent milestones - and the one-year anniversary of John Paul II's beatification tomorrow - I think it is appropriate to reproduce here this post from one year ago:

---

New Wikileaks documents show
US diplomatic analysts quickly
reversed their prejudices
about Benedict XVI


ROME, April 29, 2011 (Translated from ANSA) - Benedict XVI "avoids having too many private audiences, wishes to do away with the rockstar image of the Papacy, and return to the Papacy its role of promoting the Catholic faith".

This is apparently how US diplomatic analysts re-assessed Joseph Ratzinger after their initial prejudices about him. Before the 2005 Conclave, the US State Department thought that he would be "too rigid and too jealous of the prerogatives of the Roman Curia".

The revelations come from Wikileaks documents acquired by the Italian weekly newsmagazine L'Espresso and appear in an article in the magazine issue that went on sale today.

The documents claim that shortly after Benedict XVI became Pope, the analysts revised their views and thought he was "more open to discussion and debate than what he was described to be", and that he was "calm, learned, modest, and had no desire to be under the spotlights as his predecessor was". [Not that John Paul II deliberately sought those spotlights!]

"The marked difference with his predecessor," one assessment says, "could be the key to his success: his ability to be the Pope in his own way and ignore the gigantic shoes that he had inherited".

All very well, but two fallacies in the above: First, the task of every Pope since Peter has been to promote the faith. Much of what John Paul II did was to that end, even if Benedict XVI is doing it in other ways that are 'markedly different'.

The other is that it was never a question of Benedict XVI 'ignoring the giant shoes' he had to step into, because no one who eventually became Pope had written as much about the responsibility of the Papacy as Joseph Ratzinger had done.

But if the analyst(s) meant that he was not awed or intimidated by the fact that he was succeeding a 'giant' figure, despite his characteristic humility, then they are right. His quarter-century relationship with John Paul II was, from all accounts, on the basis of intellectual equals - each of them formidable and extraordinary - and therefore, their reciprocal recognition of each other's qualities probably cancelled out any 'awe' they may have felt about each other.

Last consideration: It was obvious the so-called 'analysts' had not done due diligence on 'backgrounding' Joseph Ratzinger before the 2005 Conclave, and that they only started realizing what his CV really was after he became Pope!

---

Also worth re-posting is this surprisingly good and off-the-beaten-path commentary from the Italian news agency TMNews which, for some reason, did not see fit to give a byline to what is an exceptional report...

---

Continuity and discontinuity
between two Popes who worked
together for so long
Translated from




VATICAN CITY, April 29, 2011 (TMNews) - Papa Ratzinger's decision to beatify John Paul II is a homage to his predecessor, more than just a response to the widespread devotion that surrounds Papa Wojtyla even six years after he died.

However, the more time passes, the more Benedict XVI's Pontificate has taken on a face of its own, even showing profound differences if not divergence between his Pontificate and the long one that preceded it.

Certainly there was great affection and close collaboration between the two. Elected Pope in 1978, the Polish Pope finally managed to persuade the then Archbishop of Munich to come to Rome in 1982 as prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

This happened several months after the assassination attempt by Ali Agca which left the Pope debilitated for some time. Cardinal Ratzinger became the official 'guardian of the faith' for the Wojtyla Pontificate. Many considered him the ideologue of the Pontificate, although John Paul II himself had a solid theological formation and made his decisions autonomously.

It was Ratzinger who oversaw the doctrinal work of the Pontificate, from the guidelines regarding liberation theology to the first 'turns of the screw' against priestly pedophilia. And yet Benedict XVI sometimes refers to the late Pope in conversation as 'the Pope' or 'the Holy Father' as if he were still around.

But even during the Wojtyla years, there was no lack of differences between the two, often subtle. Those who claim to know Ratzinger well say that although he did not make any great show of his objections, he was not in perfect agreement with John Paul II's first inter-religious meeting in Assisi, and would have preferred unequivocal rationalizations for the series of 'mea culpas' issued by the Pope during the Jubilee Year of 2000. Nor was he too happy with the grandiose style that characterized the Jubilee celebrations.

On pedophile priests, he was always among the most firm about confronting the problem decisively, but from all accounts, he came up against others in the Roman Curia who were part of John Paul's inner circle. [Despite his personal relationship with the Pope, Cardinal Ratzinger was never part of any 'circle' in the Curia.]

Two of the other 'irregularities' reported in the past few months - in the management of the real estate holdings of Propaganda Fide, and in the affairs of the Vatican bank IOR - had their roots in the Wojtyla years, but only under Benedict XVI, have they been brought under control and with new rigor.

Any 'attritions' that may have been registered in Church relations with Judaism and with Islam under the German Pope - generally the result of misunderstood or ill-received initiatives - have perhaps appeared to indicate a less easy rapport, although much more frank and direct, with the two other monotheistic religions.

Less sensitive to major geopolitical issues [a strange and highly questionable assumption, considering that one of Joseph Ratzinger's strong points has always been his unflinching analysis of international affairs!], Benedict XVI has also distinguished himself from his predecessor by less vigorous interventions on war and peace ['Less vigorous' only because he has a naturally gentler tone than John Paul II who could be stentorian as he often was in his denunciations of ongoing or potential conflicts] although he has not failed to intervene when necessary in his messages, addresses and encyclicals.

And he has, of course, decided to commemorate the 25th anniversary of that first World Day of Prayer for Peace in Assisi next October, but in his own way, and not as mere repetition of the first event.

The most obvious difference between the two Popes is their style. And Benedict XVI spoke about this without evasions in his interview-book with Peer Seewald.

He wondered aloud whether a Pope should offer himself to the crowds to be acclaimed as if he were some celebrity, and admitted that pastoral visits demand a lot "from somebody like myself".

And is he bothered at all by the comparisons with his predecessor? "I simply say I am who I am. I don't seek to be someone else. I give what I can, and when I cannot, I don't even try".

And of course, the contrast between the two in terms of physical activity was enormous. One skied, climbed mountains, swam. Whereas Benedict XVI says he does not even have time for sports, and that in any case, thank God, he says, he does not need it now. [The writer ignores that for Joseph Ratzinger, walking has always been a daily exercise, and one that obviously has served him well because he moves with a grace and stride remarkable in an octogenarian.]

But there are undoubtedly differences of [non-doctrinal] substance between the two Popes.

Papa Wojtyla apparently had considered whether he should resign when his ailment started to rob him of some normal physical functions, but he never gave any indication of this in public. In any case, he decided he could go on and did. But Benedict XVI says openly that he thinks a Pope could resign if he felt he was no longer able to carry out his functions.

On the question of priests who desire to get married, the Polish Pope opposed this with all he could [seeking to impose a waiting period on their requests for dispensation from the priestly office in the hope they would change their minds]. Papa Raztinger thinks otherwise: if a priest is involved with a woman and wants to get married, then it is better that he do so (especially if there are children) and leave the priesthood.

On the question of pedophilia and priest offenders, Papa Ratzinger says of the infamous Marcial Maciel - who had his protectors in Papa Wojtyla's entourage, "Unfortunately, his case was approached too late and too slowly. His offenses were well covered, and it was only in 2000 that we started having concrete points of reference for investigating him". [The extent to which Maciel was 'protected' by his patrons at the Vatican was evident in the fact that as late as 2004, a visibly ailing Paul II paid tribute to Maciel at a Vatican event celebrating the 50th anniversary of Maciel's ordination in 2004. Cardinal Sodano, widely believed to be Maciel's principal patron, and others who protected Maciel ought to have done as much penance by now to make amends for their offense as one likes to believe Cardinal Law has done for his own offenses in relation to the sex abuse issue.]

---

In the days immediately following February 11, 2013, and the ensuing sede vacante - that is, before we had a new Pope - I had thought that I would continue working the English section of this Forum by recounting events, statements and other texts of Benedict XVI in a time-appropriate manner according to current relevance, but I had not really worked out the details at all. Until March 13, 2013, when I had to decide on a daily basis what I was going to post about B16 looking back on his Pontificate. For now, it has been convenient to go back one year ago to recollect the last 12 months of his Pontificate to show that he carried on as he always had.

But I also see now how important it is not just to be reminded of what B16 said and did, because it pleases me to indulge my Benaddiction, but to show without straining at all that - apart from the personal preferences of Cardinal Bergoglio that Pope Francis has adopted as Pope (the outward signs of simplicity) - and the daily homilies at Santa Marta - Pope Francis has not said anything Benedict XVI and his other predecessors have not said before (or, in the case of B16, even written about extensively) that MSM had treated as 'ho-hum' or ignored when said by Benedict XVI, but suddenly celebrates as 'original' and a cause for high-fives when said by Pope Francis.

After all, the Pope, any Pope, can only proclaim Catholic doctrine as it has been handed down from Jesus through the apostolic succession. That is why Popes take the effort to cite what their predecessors have said about any doctrine or issue. He may use down-to-earth and colloquial language to express his re-statement of the same doctrine, as the current Pope often does, or use the elevated and elegant language that was customary for Benedict XVI, without thereby sacrificing accessibility and clarity. But no Pope is expressing his 'own' doctrine, only reiterating and reinforcing the Magisterium that has been kept integral through two millennia.

And in practical matters, just as Benedict XVI did not insist that Turkey should not be part of the European Union, as he had when he was a cardinal, I do not think Catholics should think that Pope Francis will push his personal inclination to favor civil unions for homosexuals, since even in Argentina, he deferred to the consensus of the other bishops who oppose it.

I did not realize until being led to this blog that the author had already written six previous essays on the blog about Benedict XVI since the shattering announcement that he was resigning his Petrine ministry; Wiker says this is the concluding essay in the series. Mr. Wikers (born 1960) is a Catholic ethicist who teaches or has taught at various Catholic universities in the USA and has written ten books presenting an orthodox Catholic view of modern issues including evolution and bioethics. He, of course, is articulating a desire long nurtured in the heart of every Benaddict, but unless God causes truly extraordinary things to happen, none of us may live long enough to see it materialize.

Benedict XVI:
Doctor of the Church
by BENJAMIN WIKER
from his blog on

Monday, April 29, 2013

Perhaps it may seem a bit premature, but here goes: Benedict XVI should be declared a Doctor of the Church.

There are, if I count correctly, 33 such esteemed Doctors, the most recent being St. Thérèse of Lisieux, who died in 1897, and the most recently declared being St. Hildegard of Bingen, who died in 1179 but was declared a Doctor of the Church by Pope Benedict in October of 2012. Benedict XVI would be number 34 (assuming no others are named beforehand). [No, Mr. Wikers, St Hildegarde was #34 and St Juan de Avila #35.]

A Doctor of the Church must be holy. Check. [There is just one big consideration: He also has to be canonized first! And he is still alive. I doubt any Pope will change the rules of the Church to make an exception for Joseph Ratzinger. Nor would he himself want that at all!]

Joseph Ratzinger was, in heart and mind, an academic, a man deeply in love with the truth, a man made to teach. But then he was named an archbishop in 1977, and in 1981, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, overseeing the faith, morals, and doctrine of the Church. And finally in 2005, he was elected Pope.

What does this have to do with holiness? I would submit that Joseph Ratzinger suffered a kind of white martyrdom, leaving what he loved the most, a quiet life of learning and teaching, to undertake what the Church needed the most. I am sure that he hated, as prefect of the CDF, being called “Rome’s Rottweiler,” as much as he disliked the unpleasant task of drawing theologians’ toes up to the doctrinal line. And if ever a man availed himself of the Room of Tears, it would have been the newly-elected Benedict.

Even under the superhuman pressures of the papacy, Benedict continued to write — that is, to teach — providing an enormous spiritual-intellectual legacy that we have only just begun to appreciate.

And that gets us to the other two qualifications for a Doctor of the Church: depth of insight in writings, and a sufficiently large number of writings, that the Church can whole-heartedly recommend as revealing the authentic Catholic Tradition.

His JESUS OF NAZARETH series alone would, I suspect qualify him on both counts. But as a casual scroll on Amazon through the pages upon pages of books by Joseph Ratzinger and then Pope Benedict XVI makes clear, the treasury of his writings overflows.

I have not had the time to read nearly as much of Benedict’s writings as I would like. But every time I read something I am astounded at the depth and breadth of his understanding, especially his profound grasp of the history of the Church — not only as an institution, but how the Church has interacted with Greek and Roman philosophy, struggled to evangelize in a hostile pagan empire, built a new civilization — Christian Europe — on the rubble of that collapsed empire, invented the university, wrestled with the Reformation and confronted newly-minted, hostile modern philosophies, and tangled with secular movements out to erase the Church from history. There seems to be no time or subject, in this 2000-year drama that Benedict has not penetrated.

I recall my first brush with his brilliance. I had just written a book (with Jonathan Witt), A Meaningful World, which laid out, in great detail, what we thought to be a new and important approach to demonstrating the existence of God through the intelligibility of the universe. Our argument was, to boil it down, that science itself depends on the pre-existing deep intelligibility of the universe. The universe seems to be constructed, layer upon layer, to be known by rational creatures like us. A randomly-contrived universe simply couldn’t be like that.

And then I read Pope Benedict’s Regensburg Address. O humility! The Pope laid out in a few paragraphs what it took us 250 pages to articulate — and set it in the context of the history of philosophy and theology.

In my most recent book, Worshipping the State, I set out a very careful historical argument showing — I thought in a very novel way — that it was the Church itself that had invented the distinction of church and state, and that modern liberalism (which likes to pose as the church-state inventor) was actually in the process of destroying it.

And then I read Benedict’s Without Roots, The Dialectics of Secularization and Christianity and The Crisis of Cultures. O humility squared! Scooped again.

You get the picture, so there’s no sense drawing any more humiliating examples. Everywhere I stepped upon 'previously uncharted territory', I found it well- and deeply-trod with Benedict’s footprints. I would have been far better, and gotten far deeper, if I’d only come to him first. And I know I’m not the only one who has had this experience.

That’s the sign of a great teacher, a great Doctor of the Church.

Almost curiously, the May 1, 2013, issue of L'Osservatore Romano dedicates a page to Benedict XVI - with two long articles comparing theologian Joseph Ratzinger to Erik Petersen, the evangelical theologian turned Catholic he admired and spoke about on a couple of occasions when he was Pope, in connection with a symposium on May 2 about the two theologians; and a brief item recounting a recent tribute from Cardinal Reinhard Marx of Munich.

Two theological itineraries
Translated from the 5/1/13 issue of


A symposium on "Joseph Ratzinger and Erik Petersen: Two theological tineraries" will be held May 2 at the Pontificia Universita della Santa Croce dies academicus (academic day) organized by the Pontifical Theological Academy, in collaboration with the Rome-based Fondazione Vaticana Joseph Ratzinger/Benedetto XVI and its earlier counterpart, the Institut Papst Benedikt XVI in Regensburg,

Fr. Manlio Sodi, president of the Pontifical Theological Academy, said "the symposium will explore three great themes that are particularly relevant to a comparison of the theological course pursued by the two - Biblical theology, liturgical theology, and their reflections on secular culture in the light of theological anthropology and Christian philosophy throughout history".

The OR then reproduces two excerpts from lectures to be given at the symposium - one comparing the background and theological development of the two men, the other examining their reflections on secular culture. [Since the articles are lengthy, I will post the translations later.]

Then, a short news item from Germany, in which a German prelate speaks up about Benedict XI for the first time I am aware of since he stepped down as Pope...

Benedict XVI and his continuing
wonder at what God has wrought
Translated from the 5/1/13 issue of



Cardinal Marx at the Aenania tribute.

Cardinal Reinhard Marx, Archbishop of Munich-Freising, says Benedict XVI has left the Catholic Church many innovative impulses, and adds that "His great Pontificate, with his teaching and his inspiration, will penetrate deeply into the future of the Church".

Cardinal Marx spoke on April 27 during an evening to pay tribute to Benedict XVI organized by the student association Aenania of Munich, of which Joseph Ratzinger had been an honorary member since 1978.



[The 'Aenania" formally called the Katholische Deutsche Studenten Verbindung zu Muenchen (German Catholic Student Association of Munich) was the founding member of a federation (Cartellverband) of male fraternities that now counts with 125 similar student organizations in Germany, Austria and Switzerland/As Archbishop of Munich=Freising, Cardinal Ratzinger was its Patron as well as honorary member. The KDStVs are fraternities founded in the 19th century as part of a Catholic front to resist the pressures of the Prussian government to reduce Catholic influence in Germany.]

He said that as a theologian, Benedict XVI "never ceased to be curious and to marvel continuously at what God can do" and taught at the same time that "man should continue to discover the Gospel as the 'news' par excellence, and to safeguard it not as if it were treasures in a museum but as a constant source of rebirth, of renewal of the faith, of Catholic life, of the Church as a whole, and of every individual".

He said Benedict XVI considered the Catholic faith as "the greatest spiritual adventure of the human spirit, that is also demanding and aims to lead us to the great things that matter".

[Of course, I found out by checking the site of the Archdiocese of Munich-Freising, that the OR item used the first few paragraphs of a press release by the Archdiocese. I will add the rest of it after translation.

Honoring St. Pius V
Another curiosity in today's OR is that Page 8, usually reserved for news about the current Pope, is dedicated almost completely to St. Pius V, with an article about him written by Mons. Gerhard Mueller, Prefect of the CDF, whose patron saint is the great Pope of the Counter-Reformation, an item and photo of Mons. Mueller celebrating Mass at the CDF chapel on Pius V's feast day yesterday,
and an interview about Pius V with the rector of the Basilica of Santa Maria Maggiore, where the Pope-saint is buried.


The caption says: "Following a custom by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger when he was Prefect of the CDF, Mons. Mueller said Mass at the CDF chapel yesterday (April 30) on the feast day of St. Pius V, patron of the Congregation."


About Benedict XVI's return
to the Vatican tomorrow


VATICAN CITY, April 30 (Translated from AGI) - "Benedict XVI is an old man, but as far as his health is concerned, there are no specific pathologies at this time," Father Federico Lombardi, Vatican spokesman, reiterated today to questions from newsmen.

He confirmed that the emeritus Pope will return to the Vatican on Thursday afternoon, May 2, "where he will be welcomed at the Vatican heliport with great consideration". He did not say whether Pope Francis would be present at the arrival.

Italian jurist says Benedict XVI
shattered stereotypes in arguing
law and morality based on reason

by Mary Zurolo Walsh
April 29, 2013

NEW HAVEN – A lecture by Judge Marta Cartabia of the Constitutional Court of Italy, could have been titled "Surprise Pope," according to Professor Mary Ann Glendon, a speaker at the April 14 event.

That is because Judge Cartabia traced the ways the thought of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, expressed in his speeches, shatters the stereotyped images of him.

Her talk, titled "A Journey with Benedict XVI through the Spirit of Constitutionalism," were part of the Judge Guido Calabresi Fellowship in Religion and Law at the St. Thomas More Catholic Center at Yale University. The talk was sponsored by The Lehrman Institute.

"The Catholic Church is very committed to family life and social needs," Judge Cartabia told the approximately 40 people in attendance. "We might expect Pope Benedict XVI to emphasize the importance of those values of social life. He could have taken the opportunity to take a stance in favor of those moral values. But he didn’t…. He is much more concerned with the methodology than with the outcome," Judge Cartabia said. [In the sense that since Benedict XVI believes that the use of reason, which includes natural law that is understood and accepted by any thinking person, will lead to the right outcome.]

Judge Cartabia, 50, one of the youngest members and one of only three women ever appointed to the Constitutional Court of the Italian Republic, examined the relationship between law and justice and the applications of faith and reason to law.

Judge Cartabia said that although Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI is not a legal scholar, she has "always been struck by Pope Benedict’s response to the problem of law and justice."

In order to recognize what is the right and just law, Judge Cartabia said, Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI does not cite revelation or dogma. Instead, he says that we need "faith and reason."

She noted that contrary to the assumption that religious precepts can’t be introduced into the public debate because they are "discussion stoppers," the retired pontiff "demands that Catholic people engage in a thorough use of reason."

"He requires Christians to take part in democratic dialogue using arguments open to everybody," Judge Cartabia said.

She said that although a nation’s constitution is a great achievement in the history of humanity, the teaching of Pope Benedict warns that such documents are not enough to ensure that people will be protected from the uncontrolled power of the majority.

"Legality often prevails over justice," Judge Cartabia said. "Benedict was considered a conservative, but he is a great reformer because he said each generation has to find anew their own path to justice," Judge Cartabia said.

Professor Glendon, Learned Hand Professor of Law at Harvard University and former U.S. ambassador to the Holy See, served as the respondent to Judge Cartabia’s lecture. She offered four observations in reaction to the talk.

Professor Glendon praised the lecture, saying that "the most salient theme was the emphatic defense of reason." She also noted that Pope Benedict’s understanding of reason was not merely an understanding based on science but is "a more capacious concept."

"What is it we laity … are supposed to take away from [Pope Benedict’s] speeches emphasizing faith and reason in relation to political topics?" Professor Glendon asked. "Religious leaders speak at the level of principles, and it’s up to the laity to bring those guidelines to life."

She said Pope Benedict’s call to the laity to use their consciences as well as their critical thinking skills is certainly challenging to the faithful.

Judge Cartabia began her lecture with a quote taken from a speech Pope Benedict gave to the Budestag, or German Parliament, in 2011. He noted that when God invited the young King Solomon, on his accession to the throne, to make a request, King Solomon asked not for success, wealth or a long life, but for a "listening heart so that he may govern God’s people, and discern between good and evil."

"This idea of a listening heart to distinguish between good and evil accompanies me every day in the courtroom because my desire is to perform my duty with a listening heart," Judge Cartabia said.

Following the talk, several people said they appreciated the judge’s ability to show them a side of Pope Benedict that went beyond media stereotypes.

"This was really great to look into some of this in a very different way from what you’d get from the media," said Jane Hubbard, of New York.

"She [Judge Cartabia] gives us so much to consider with regard to not just the life of faith of Catholics in the public sphere, but any believer in the public sphere," Mr. Marshall said. He also praised her as "a wonderful role model."

Jadwiga Biskupska, a graduate student, said she was glad to see that Yale was bringing in Catholic intellectuals from outside of the United States.

Wednesday, May 1, Fifth Week of Easter
Feast of St. Joseph the Worker
Patron of the Universal Church

HAPPY NAME DAY ONCE AGAIN

TO OUR BELOVED BENEDICT XVI

as he prepared to return to the Vatican!

NB: Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI has four name days during the year:
March 19 and May 1, for St. Joseph;
March 21 (observed by the Benedictines)
and July 11 (official Church holiday) for St. Benedict.\'
and a fifth if we include the feast of
St. Aloysius Gonzaga, on June 21.




Second anniversary of the beatification of John Paul II, one of the most memorable days in the recent history of the universal Church.

NB: Today is also our fourth anniversary on this Forum.
My profound thanks once again to Gloria for being our very gracious and generous host.



AT THE VATICAN TODAY

General Audience - Pope Francis reflected on St. Joseph the Laborer, the value of work even for young people, and his concern for continuing unemployment in Italy, and against what he called 'slave labor' still practised in some parts of the world. He also reminded the faithful that the month of May is dedicated to Mary.
The Vatican Radio translation of the catechesis may be found here:
http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2013/05/01/audience:_on_may_1st_an_appeal_against_slave_labor/en1-687958

POPE FRANCIS'S PRAYER INTENTIONS
FOR MAY 2013

---

General intention:
That administrators of justice may act always with integrity and right conscience.”

Missionary intention:
that seminaries, especially those of mission Churches, may form pastors after the Heart of Christ, fully dedicated to proclaiming the Gospel.

---

NB: Pope Francis is keeping to the Prayer Intentions for 2013 approved by Benedict XVI in 2012.

Wednesday, May 1, Fifth Week of Easter
Feast of St. Joseph the Worker
Patron of the Universal Church

HAPPY NAME DAY ONCE AGAIN

TO OUR BELOVED BENEDICT XVI

as he prepares to return to the Vatican!

NB: Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI has four name days during the year:
March 19 and May 1, for St. Joseph;
March 21 (observed by the Benedictines)
and July 11 (official Church holiday) for St. Benedict.\'
and a fifth if we include the feast of
St. Aloysius Gonzaga, on June 21.




Second anniversary of the beatification of John Paul II, one of the most memorable days in the recent history of the universal Church.

NB: Today is also our fourth anniversary on this Forum.
My profound thanks once again to Gloria for being our very gracious and generous host.



AT THE VATICAN TODAY

General Audience - Pope Francis reflected on St. Joseph the Laborer, the value of work even for young people, and his concern for continuing unemployment in Italy, and against what he called 'slave labor' still practised in some parts of the world. He also reminded the faithful that the month of May is dedicated to Mary.
The Vatican Radio translation of the catechesis may be found here:
http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2013/05/01/audience:_on_may_1st_an_appeal_against_slave_labor/en1-687958

POPE FRANCIS'S PRAYER INTENTIONS
FOR MAY 2013

---

General intention:
That administrators of justice may act always with integrity and right conscience.”

Missionary intention:
that seminaries, especially those of mission Churches, may form pastors after the Heart of Christ, fully dedicated to proclaiming the Gospel.

---

NB: Pope Francis is keeping to the Prayer Intentions for 2013 approved by Benedict XVI in 2012.

When Pope Benedict
beatified John Paul II ...

May 1, 2012

A year ago, Benedict XVI beatified his beloved predecessor, John Paul II, in front a vast sea of pilgrims - more than a million - who had gathered in St. Peter's square and spilled into the nearby streets.

It was a prayerful moment but also a joyful one and pilgrims from Karol Wojtyla's native Poland attended in great numbers.

Over a dozen heads of State were present alongside the cardinals, bishops , priests and men and women religious who were seated up close to the altar.

Only six years had gone by since the death of John Paul II, and in his homily on this occasion the Pope mentioned how he had wanted the cause of beatification to move forward with reasonable haste: " And now the longed-for day has come,it came quickly because this is what was pleasing to the Lord: John Paul II is blessed..."

Benedict XVI pointed to how this ceremony was timed to coincide with the Second Sunday of Easter which the late Polish Pontiff had 5/2/12

5/2/12
P.S. CNA finally did file a JP2 story at yesterday afternoon reporting on the April 30 prayer vigil....

John Paul II's beatification
remembered one year later
By David Kerr


Vatican City, May 1, 2012 (CNA/EWTN News) - Blessed Pope John Paul II was remembered one year after his beatification with a candlelight prayer vigil at the site where he hosted World Youth Day 2000 in Rome on April 30.

“What was the secret of John Paul II? I think I can say, the unity between faith and life. He lived for God and for man to bring to God, because he was happy,” said Cardinal Agostino Vallini, Vicar General of the Diocese of Rome at the vigil.

He addressed thousands of young people from the Diocese of Rome and beyond at Tor Vergata on the eastern outskirts of Rome. It was here that Pope John Paul II had told millions of young pilgrims to World Youth Day 2000 that “in saying ‘yes’ to Christ, you say ‘yes’ to all your noblest ideals.”

Last night the World Youth Day cross returned to Tor Vergata along with many of those who were in attendance 12 years. This time, however, they arrived with their husbands, wives and children to thank Blessed John Paul for his inspirational witness.

“Twelve years ago I was here, under this same Cross, on stage with the choir of the diocese of Rome,” said one female pilgrim to Vatican Radio.

“Today, after 12 years, I am here to thank him again, because I’m here with my family, my husband, my son who is called John Paul Emmanuel.”

“I am getting goose bumps just at the thought of being here,” said another veteran of World Youth Day 2000 who described that encounter with Pope John Paul as “a moment that changed my life, which matured my faith, which made me really see what the faith truly was and that the faith could be the center of my life.”

In his homily Cardinal Vallini recalled Pope John Paul II’s message of hope and urged the young and not-so-young people in attendance to continue to continue to be “generous” with God.

It was on May 1, 2011, that Pope Benedict XVI beatified his predecessor six years after Pope John Paul’s death. The beatification ceremony in Rome was attended by over 1.5 million pilgrims. Included in their number was Sister Marie Simon-Pierre, the French nun whose miraculous cure from Parkinson's Disease paved the way for the beatification.



Just to bring back the flavor of that very special day, here is the photo summary I attempted of it the day after...

---

John Paul II's Beatification Day yesterday, May 1, 2011, was a truly historic event only likely to be equalled by what will almost certainly be the next big moment in the great Pope's story, his canonization...

Very appropriately, the event has left the mass media - including the normally logorrheic commentariat - relatively dumbstruck. The ceremony said it all, and what needed to be said in words was expressed so magnificently, and with his usual simplicity, by Benedict XVI in his homily. All other words are superfluous, but not the photos...

As I have been unable to do anything more than sort the available newsphotos, here is an impromptu montage - snapshots from the Powerpoint pages on which I sort and group the photos for eventual formatting and posting - until I can post them in the regular manner...

PHOTO SUMMARY:
BEATIFICATION DAY


The mini-slideshow from Vatican Radio online with highlights of the day, and an AP fact sheet on John Paul II.





Establishing shots of St. Peter's Square. In the top photo, I inserted an inset of the Mass that took place outside Cracow.


Photos I used for the Beatification Day banner.



Pope Benedict arrives for the ceremony.



As usual, too few photos of the Mass. The bottom panel shows the presentation of the Blessed's relic to Benedict XVI
by Suor Tobiana, John Paul II's chief housekeeper at the Vatican, and Sr. Marie Simon Pierre, the late Pope's 'miracle nun'.


Panel shows a videocap showing the Pope giving his homily, on a split screen with a JP2 poster, and photos from the End of the Mass,



Pope Benedict in prayer before the casket of John Paul II in St. Peter's Basilica; the other prelates at the Mass followed.


The Pope met the President of Poland and his wife, and President Napolitano of Italy, as well as other visiting heads of state,
before the Basilica was opened to the public to pray at the casket.

---

What happened to the 'Twelve'
and where they are buried
By Mark Shea

April 28, 2013

One of the more curious aspects of our Age of Credulity is the complete and utter faith postmoderns put in the notion that antiquity set about a massive project of inventing twelve fictional apostles and then scattering their graves all over the Mediterranean and building shrines to them.

There’s no need to even check to see if this far-fetched thesis is might be problematic. It's - just - true. And Christians are gullible fools if they think, even for a second, that the reason the shrine grew up is because somebody that mattered a lot to the early Christian community in that area is buried there.

Nobody does this with mummies buried in the Valley of the Kings. When the shrine inscriptions tell you Imhotep is buried there, people pretty much say, “Hey! Look! Imhotep’s mummy!”

But for some weird reason, when you open a tomb beneath the high altar of St. Peter’s (inscribed “Peter is Within”) and find the bones of a crucified man, postmoderns say, “That could be *anybody*” and assume that it is, in fact, anybody but Peter, who many are not even sure existed.

And, of course, from that amazingly credulous skepticism comes the even more amazingly credulous skepticism that 12 fictional people invented the even more fictional Jesus of Nazareth.



We truly live in an age that will believe anything, except the obvious. Point out the tombs of the apostles, attested by a whole civilization and it’s all rubbish. Put a bone box in James Cameron’s hands and let him babble something about the Jesus Dynasty and the deeply rational postmodern mind will believe every word.

In case you are interested, James was actually the son (with Joses, Jude, and Simon (his successor to the See of Jerusalem) of Cleopas (the Emmaus disciple) and “Mary, the wife of Clopas). Not a sibling of Jesus.

A few years ago, I posted something in PAPA RATZINGER FORUM about a book in Italian about the fate of the Apostles and where their tombs are located,

but although I could retrieve the book cover easily from my photo files, I have yet to locate the actual post

The Vatican today took the unusual step of reproducing on its daily bulletin an interview with the Deputy Secretary of Satte (Sostituto) Mons. Angelo Becciu, published on Page 1 of the May 1, 2013, issue of L'Osservatore Romano, in which Becciu says Pope Francis has been surprised at statements attributed to him which he never said.

Reform under Pope Francis:
'Absolutely premature to make hypotheses
about the future re-structuring of the Curia'
Interview with Mons. Angelo Becciu
Translated from

May 1, 2013

On April 13, it was reported that Pope Francis has constituted a group of eight cardinals to advise him on the governance of the universal Church and to study a plan to revise the Apostolic Constitution Pastor bonus [promulgated by John Paul II in 1984 to spell out the structure and functions of the Roman Curia and its various offices].

The decision raised great interest and gave way to not a few speculations. About which Archbishop Angelo Becciu, deputy Secretary of State, spoke to our newspaper.

About the reforms of the Curia, many opinions have been widely aired regarding balance of powers, moderatorts, coordinators, 'a super-ministry for the (Vatican) economy', a revolution...
Actually, it is rather strange. The Pope still has to meet with the group of advisers he has chosen, and yet 'advice' has been raining down. After having spoken to the Holy Father, I can say that at this time, it is absolutely premature to advance any hypothesis regarding the future of the Roman Curia.

Pope Francis is listening to everyone, but above all, he will listen to his chosen advisers. Subsequently, there will be a project to revise Pastor bonus, but this will obviously follow its own course.

Much has also been said about IOR (Istituto per Opere Religiose, the official name of what is commonly called 'the Vaqtican bank'), and some have said it may be abolished...
The Pope has been surprised by seeing some statements attributed to him which he never said and which misrepresent his thinking. The only reference he has made to IOR in public was during a brief homily in Santa Marta, spoken off the cuff, in which he said quite passionately that the Church is a love story between God and men, and how human structures, like IOR, are less important.

The reference [to IOR] was made in good humor [Besciu used the Italian word he used is 'battuta', which means in this sense, a joke or a quip] because some employees of IOR were present at the Mass, made in the context of a serious call never to lose sight of what is essential in the Church.

[Obviously, the Vatican - starting with the Pope - has realized the 'strangeness' of the reference made by Pope Francis to IOR at that homily - a reference that the OR itself omitted in its report of the homily, but which was included and later deleted from the report of the Italian service of Vatican Radio on the same homily. I remarked at the time about the inappropriateness of the remark within a papal homily.]

Can one say that there is no imminent change to the actual structure of the Curial dicasteries?
I do not know about timing. Nonetheless, the Pope has asked all of us, who hold responsible positions in the dicasteries, to continue in our work, without wishing for now to confirm anyone in their present positions.

The same goes for the members of the Congregations and Pontifical Councils. The normal cycle of tenure, which is renewed every five years, has been suspended for now, and everyone remains in place "until otherwise provided" ('donec aliter provideatur').

This shows the desire of the Holy Father to take the time necessary for reflection - and prayer, we must not forget that - in order to have a deeper knowledge of the situation. [i.e., the Pope is not necessarily just 'swallowing' all the dire assessments of the Roman Curia generously ventilated in the past several months without any attempt at specific substantiation, not just by the media but by leading cardinals, some of them in the Pope's Council of 8.]

Regarding the council of advisers, some have said that having them could raise a question about the primacy of the Pope...
It is a consultative organ, not a decisional one, and I really cannot see why this move could raise any question about the primacy of the Pope.

But it is a gesture of great relevance which signals precisely the way in which the Holy Father intends to carry out his ministry. We must not forget that the first task assigned to the eight cardinals is to assist the Pontiff in the governance of the universal Church.

Curiosity about the eventual structures and arrangements in the Roman Curia should not relegate to second place the profound sense of the decision taken by Pope Francis.

But is not the expression 'advisory' too vague?
On the contrary, giving advise is an important action which is defined theologically in the Church and is expressed at many levels. Think, for example, of all the participatory organisms in the dioceses and parishes, or the councils formed by superiors and provincials in the religious orders.

The function of advice must be interpreted theologically. In the worldly view, a council that does not have deliberative power is irrelevant, but that would be saying that the Church is like a business corporation.

But theologically, giving advise is a function of absolute relevance: in order to help one's superior in the work of discernment, to understand what the Holy Spirit is asking of the Church at a given historical moment. Without this in mind, even the authentic significance of the act of governing the Church cannot be understood.

What do you feel about working with Pope Francis?
I was able to work closely with Pope Benedict, and I am continuing my work with Pope Francis. Of course, each has his own personality and his own style, and I feel truly privileged for this close contact with two men who are totally dedicated to the good of the Church, detached from themselves but immersed in God and with one single passion: to make the beauty of the Gospel known to men and women today.

[Thank you, Mons. Becciu, for avoiding the facile attitude taken by almost every single one of the Church hierarchy who has spoken in public since March 13, 2005 - either ignoring that Benedict XVI had been Pope for the past eight years, or referring to his Pontificate only to suggest that it represented everything wrong with the Church that the new Pope was elected to change for the better - a shameless and shameful attitude I cannot explain in men of God considered 'princes of the Church'.

I am sure, however, that the emphatic statements made by Mons. Becciu about the intentions of Pope Francis with regard to Curial reform will not put an end to the 'rain' of advice and speculations in the MSM, if not of some of the Church hierarchy. who will not miss a chance to put down Benedict XVI to advance their agenda or for their own personal reasons.]

An Italian journalist, Francisco Peloso, has taken note of the Becciu interview and the prominence given to it by the Vatican, in an article entitled "Pope Francis's first 'tactless' incident?"
www.linkiesta.it/papa-francesco-ior
But Lella notes on her blog that apart from Avvenire and two other newspapers, the Italian press has apparently ignored Becciu's interview (as the MSM ignores anything that runs contrary to the narrative they have chosen to impose on any subject.]