President's Messages
Hans Kung AwardHuman
Contemporary Catholic Belief and Action
The mission of ARCC is to bring about substantive structural change within the Catholic Church by seeking to institutionalize a collegial understanding of church where decision making is shared and accountability is realized among Catholics of every kind and conditio n.
Once people start to believe change is possible,
the drive to achieve it accelerates.
- Patrick Sullivan, ARCC President
The uncontrollable consequences
of a broken promise
How Benedict XVI found himself embroiled in controversy
over a book on celibacy
Robert Mickens
It was not supposed to be like this. And, yet, it could have been - and may still become - a lot worse.
Benedict XVI has found himself in the middle of an ugly controversy over his alleged co-authorship of a book strenuously defending priestly celibacy. And it looks suspiciously like an attempt to block Pope Francis from even considering the ordination of married priests.
The other co-author and the initiator of the writing project is African Cardinal Robert Sarah, a longtime Vatican official who has become one of the heroes of traditionalist Catholics opposing Francis.
The book, which is already out in French and soon to be ready in English, is called "From the Depths of Our Hearts". The conservative French daily, Le Figaro, revealed its existence Jan. 12 by publishing excerpts and an interview with the cardinal.
And what a stir it caused! Especially because of its timing
|
A warning to Pope Francis
The slim volume appeared just weeks before Francis is expected to release a document in response to proposals from bishops who attended a Synod assembly on the Amazon last October at the Vatican. One of their requests was for the pope to approve the priestly ordination of married men of proven virtue (viri probati).
Many saw the Sarah-Benedict book, given that one of the co-authors is a former pope, as an exerted effort (even a warning) to dissuade Francis from doing so.
But less than 48 hours after news of the book appeared, Benedict's personal secretary - Archbishop Georg Gänswein - said the former pope had never consented to being co-author and demanded his name be removed from the book's cover.
The former pope, he explained, had only submitted an essay to Cardinal Sarah, but had not written anything else. Nor had he seen the book's cover, according to the secretary.
Catholic discussion forums on social media were sizzling with all sorts of speculation -- and bitter fighting - over what had actually happened.
Had Cardinal Sarah manipulated Benedict or tricked him into being a co-author? Or had Archbishop Gänswein given the cardinal permission to cite Benedict's authorship, only to be forced to deny the former pope's involvement when Benedict or others expressed their displeasure?
Just a misunderstanding?
It is still not clear exactly what happened. The archbishop said Benedict never agreed to put his name to a book. But the cardinal had already produced several typed letters, signed by Benedict, that suggest he actually did.
The cardinal - at least for now - has acquiesced, saying Benedict's name will be removed from future editions. However, he insists that the former pope was a contributor and the text would remain unaltered.
"It was a question of misunderstanding, without casting doubt on the good faith of Cardinal Sarah," conceded the archbishop.
Nonetheless, the cardinal did not emerge well from the incident. Some traditionalists who had previously been enamored of him blamed him for trying to manipulate Benedict.
Others say it was all the fault of Gänswein, who then threw Sarah under the bus when this blew up in their faces.
As for the actual substance of the book? Leaving aside Benedict's contribution, the rest of the work grossly misrepresents the Church's doctrine on the connection between the priesthood and celibacy. It also ignores the facts of history.
And, furthermore, it dishonestly suggests that what is at stake is the end of the celibate priesthood. In fact, no one has ever suggested abolishing celibacy, only that the practice of ordaining married men, as well, be resumed throughout the Church - as it was in the beginning.
The badly made arguments in the book are actually of minor importance. The real problem is that a former pope has engaged (or has been enrolled) in an effort to hinder the freedom of his successor to govern the universal Church.
Who's to blame?
There's a lot of blame to cast around.
Archbishop Georg Gänswein certainly must own his share. The 63-year-old German prelate has been Benedict XVI's personal secretary since 2003, two years before Josef Ratzinger's election to the papacy.
Just two months before announcing his resignation as pope (something he'd decided on several months earlier), Benedict made Gänswein prefect of the Papal Household and ordained him bishop.
The new pope, Francis, left him in that recently appointed role. In addition to continuing as prefect, Gänswein remained as Benedict's personal secretary.
The two men, and four consecrated laywomen, live in the same multi-storied residence in the Vatican Gardens. In the nearly seven years since his retirement, Benedict has received visitors almost daily at their home. His secretary is the "gatekeeper," deciding who gets access to him and who does not.
In the past few years, as Benedict has grown frailer, the archbishop's role as guardian and caregiver has become more vital. A documentary that aired earlier this month on Bavarian television showed the former pope in an advanced stage of decline.
And the signature on the letters that he supposedly wrote (or dictated) to give Cardinal Sarah permission to publish his thoughts on celibacy is barely legible.
This suggests that there is at least the possibility that someone - i.e. Benedict's secretary - took the responsibility for negotiating the book project with the cardinal.
Che Sarah Sarah
And what of the cardinal's culpability?
Robert Sarah has worked at the Vatican since 2001 when John Paul II appointed him secretary at the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples (Propaganda Fide). The 22 years prior to that he had served as archbishop of his home diocese of Konakry in Guinea, a post he took up at age 34.
During his time at Propaganda, then-Archbishop Sarah was known as a quiet, prayerful man. But the signs of ideological conservatism emerged only later, after Benedict XVI appointed him president of the now-defunct Pontifical Council "Cor Unum" in 2010 and made him a cardinal.
After the election of Pope Francis, the African was part of the first group of cardinalFs to express displeasure with the new pope's pastoral reforms, especially regarding people in irregular marriage situations. He began to write essays and books that demonstrated a lack of complete trust in Francis.
So it was surprising when the Jesuit pope appointed the cardinal prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments in November 2014.
As reported before, the pope's first choice for the post was Archbishop Piero Marini, the former papal Master of Ceremonies. But people close to Benedict (perhaps at the behest of the retired pope) urged Francis not to make the appointment, warning that it would cause a war with Catholic traditionalists.
At their suggestion, then, the pope appointed Cardinal Sarah. And since then Francis has had to bring the cardinal to heel for trying to sandbag the pope's attempts to promote liturgical reforms such as washing women's feet on Holy Thursday. The pope also had to reprimand him for publicly supporting the traditionalists' call for a further reform (i.e. undoing) of the Vatican II liturgical reform.
Cardinal Sarah is also as guilty as Archbishop Gänswein for whipping up controversy with this new book. Both men are politically conservative and ecclesiastically neo-traditionalist. They are in league with right-wing European politicians, socialites and retrograde movements.
They are both very much aware that these people and groups have long looked to Benedict XVI as a counterweight to Pope Francis, some even to the point of claiming Benedict is the only legitimate pope.
By enlisting the support of the retired pope in their public campaigns - such as this new book project - they deliberately feed opposition to Francis.
The buck stops here
But the person who is most responsible for this latest mess is none other than Benedict himself.
When he relinquished the papacy in 2013 he also forfeited his rights and duties as Bishop of Rome. He made a bold and daring move, doing something no other pope had done in almost 600 years.
But he and his small group of advisors did not consult widely (if at all) to map out how this novel situation would be regulated. There were no established protocols - and there still aren't - for a retired pope. Benedict and his people seemed to make it up on the fly.
However, he certainly seemed to have a clear intuition - indeed, a conviction - that the arrangement would work only if he were to be very careful not to suggest in any way that he still had or shared papal power.
So he promised to adhere to a self-imposed silence, saying he would from now on be "hidden from the world."
It only took Benedict six months before he broke his silence when he entered into a philosophical/theological debate with a scholar who criticized one of the early works of Joseph Ratzinger. The former pope gave permission for their correspondence to be published.
Since then he has written letters of support to numerous groups, mostly of a traditionalist bent. They have, in turn, used his earlier writings and thoughts, often in distorted ways, to wage war against Francis.
He could have put a halt to that by publicly disassociating himself from these voices. It is the one time that breaking his silence would have been justified.
And now, in his frailty, he can no longer defend himself. And those who have the duty to protect him are stupidly and irresponsibly trying to make sure his voice - a voice that should have remained silent - continues to weigh-in on the debates that are shaping the future of the Church.
But, ultimately, this is not their fault. They are only continuing what Benedict XVI started when he began ignoring his self-imposed vow of silence.
What we are now witnessing are the uncontrollable consequences of a broken promise. And if things continue as they are, those consequences could end up being quite damaging and irreversible.
Robert Mickens, LCI Editor in Chief, has lived, studied and worked in Rome for 30 years. Over that time he has studied at the Gregorian University, worked at Vatican Radio and been the Rome correspondent for the London Tablet. He regularly comments on CNN, the BBC and the Australian Broadcasting Corporation.
|
|
|
|