Categoria: English

Is Pope Francis inaugurating the third Millennium?

Leonardo Boff1 comentário

The first millennium of Christianity was marked by the paradigm of community. The Churches had relative autonomy regarding their own rites: Orthodox, Coptic, Ambrosian from Milan, Mozarabic, from Spain, and others. They venerated their own martyrs and confessors and had their own theologies, as seen in the flourishing Christianity of North Africa with Saint Augustine, Saint Cyprian and the lay theologian Tertullian. Those Churches recognized each other, and even though a mostly juridical vision in Rome was already appearing, the primacy of charity predominated .

The second millennium was characterized by the paradigm of the Church as a perfect and hierarchichal society: an absolutist monarchy centered in the figure of the Pope as supreme head (cephalic), endowed with unlimited powers and, most recently, with infallibility, when he makes declarations as such in matters of faith and morality. The Pontifical State was created, with an army, a financial system and legislation that included the death penalty. A body of experts of the institution was created, the Roman Curia, responsible for the world ecclesiastical administration. This centralization produced the Romanization of all of Christianity. The evangelization of Latin America, Asia and Africa was accomplished within a process of colonial conquest of the world, and meant that the Roman model was transplanted, practically annulling the embodiment of the local cultures. The strict separation between the clergy and the lay was made official. The lay had no power of decision, (in the first millennium the lay participated in the election of bishops and even of the Pope), and were turned into childlike non-entities, in law and fact.

The palatial ways of the priests, bishops, cardinals and popes were affirmed. The titles of power of the Roman emperors, starting with those of Pope and Sumo Pontiff, were transferred to the bishop of Rome. The cardinals, princes of the Church, dressed up as the high Renaissance nobility, and so it has remained until now, scandalizing more than a few Christians, who were used to seeing Jesus of Nazareth as poor, a man of the people, persecuted, tortured and executed on the cross.

All indications are that this model of Church ended with the resignation of Benedict XVI, the last Pope from this monarchical model, in the tragic context of scandals that have touched the very heart of the credibility of the Christian message.

The election of Pope Francis, who comes «from the end of the world», as he presented himself, from the periphery of Christianity, from the Great South where 60% of Roman Catholics live, will inaugurate the ecclesiastic paradigm of the Third Millennium: the Church as a vast network of Christian communities, rooted in the various cultures, some more ancient than the Western cultures, such as the Chinese, Indian and Japanese, the tribal cultures of Africa and the communities of Latin America. It is also embodied in the modern culture of the technologically advanced countries, with a faith that is also lived out in small communities. All these incarnations have something in common: the urbanization of humanity, where more than the 80% of the population live in huge conglomerates of millions and millions of persons.

In this context, it will be impossible to talk of territorial parishes, but of neighborhood communities, of the buildings, of the streets nearby. In that Christianity, the lay will be protagonists, encouraged by priests who may or may not be married, or by women priests or women bishops, bound more by spirituality than administration. The Churches will have different faces.

The Reformation will not be restricted to the Roman curia, that is in a calamitous state, but will be extended to the entire institution of the Church. Perhaps only by convoking a new Council, with representatives from all of Christendom, will the Pope have the security and the master lines of the Church of the Third Millennium. May the Spirit not fail him.

Translation from the Spanish sent by
Melina Alfaro, cybermelinaalfaro@bandalibre.com,
done at REFUGIO DEL RIO GRANDE, Texas, EE.UU.

Francis of Assisi and Francis of Rome

Leonardo Boff4 Comentários

From the moment the Bishop of Rome, and thus Pope, was elected and took the name Francis. the comparison between the two Francis: the one from Assisi and the one of Rome, became inevitable. Moreover, Francis of Rome explicitly referenced Francis of Assisi. Clearly, it is not about mimicry, but about looking for points of inspiration that will inform us about the style that Francis of Rome wants to give to the direction of the universal Church.

There is an undeniable common point: the crisis of the ecclesiastic institution. Young Francis of Assisi is said to have heard a voice coming from the Crucifix of San Damiano, that told him: “Francis, repair my Church for it is in shambles”. Giotto depicted it well, showing Francis supporting the heavy Church building on his shoulders.

We are also experiencing a grave crisis, caused by the internal scandals of the ecclesiastic institution itself. A universal outcry has been heard («The voice of the people is the voice of God»): «repair the Church whose morality and credibility are in shambles». And to a Cardinal from the periphery of the world, Bergoglio, from Buenos Aires, has been trusted the mission, as Pope, of restoring the Church in the light of Francis of Assisi.

In the time of Saint Francis of Assisi, Pope Innocence III (1198-1216), who presented himself as «the representative of Christ» was triumphant. With Innocence III, the supreme degree of secularization of the ecclesiastic institution was reached, with explicit interest in «dominium mundi», dominion of the world. In fact, for a time, practically all of Europe, including Russia, was subjected to the Pope of Rome. Life was lived then with the greatest pomp and glory. In 1210, filled with doubt, Innocence III recognized Francis of Assisi’s path of poverty. The crisis at that time was theological, because the Church as a temporal and sacred empire contradicted everything Jesus of Nazareth wanted.

Francis of Assisi lived the antithesis of the imperial Church. To the Gospel of power, he offered the power of the Gospel: total relinquishment, radical poverty and extreme simplicity. He did not place himself in the clerical or monastic framework, but as a layman, he was guided by the Gospel, lived strictly, on the periphery of the cities, where the poor and the lepers lived, and in the heart of nature, living a cosmic union with all beings. He spoke to the center from the periphery, asking for conversion. Without explicitly criticizing, he began a great reform, starting from below, but without breaking with Rome. We find ourselves before a Christian genius, with a seductive humanity and fascinating tenderness and caring, who openly discovered the best of our humanity.

I think that this strategy must have impressed Francis of Rome. The Roman curia and the clerical habits of all the Church must be reformed. But there should not be a rupture that could tear apart the body of Christianity.

Another point that most certainly inspired Francis of Rome: the centrality that Francis of Assisi gave to the poor. Francis of Assisi did not organize work for the poor, but he lived with the poor and like the poor. Francis of Rome, ever since we have known him, has been reiterating that the problem of the poor will not be resolved without the participation of the poor, not by philanthropy but by social justice. Social justice diminishes the inequalities that damage Latin America, and, in general, the whole world.

The third point of inspiration is very pertinent now: how do we relate to Mother Earth and the scarcity of goods and services. In the inaugural address of his enthronement, Francis of Rome used the word caring more than 8 times. It is the ethic of caring, as I myself have strongly suggested, that will save humanity and guarantee the vitality of the ecosystems. Francis of Assisi, patron saint of ecology, will be the model for a respectful and fraternal relationship towards all beings, not above nature, but side by side with her.

Francis of Assisi maintained with Clare a relationship of great friendship and true love. He exalted women and their virtues, considering them «gentlewomen». I hope that Francis of Assisi will inspire in Francis of Rome a relationship with women, who are the majority of the Church, not only of respect, but one which gives them a leading role in the decision-making of the paths of faith and spirituality in the new millennium.

Finally, according to philosopher Max Scheler, Francis of Assisi is the Western prototype of cordial and emotional reason. This reason makes us sensitive to the passion of those who suffer and to the cries of the Earth. Francis of Rome, unlike Benedict XVI, who was the expression of intellectual reason, is a clear example of the cordial intelligence that loves the people, embraces people, kisses children, and sees the multitudes lovingly. If modern reason blends with the sensibility of the heart, it will not be difficult to care for our Common Home and for the disinherited sons and daughters, and we will nourish the most Franciscan conviction that by lovingly embracing the world, we are embracing God.

Translation from the Spanish sent by
Melina Alfaro, melina.alfaro@gmail.com,
done at REFUGIO DEL RIO GRANDE, Texas, EE.UU.

The Pope who pays his own bills

Leonardo Boff2 Comentários

Actions, not words, convince people. Ideas can illuminate, but it is examples that attract and move us. Examples are understood by everyone. Most explanations tend to confuse more than clarify. Actions speak for themselves.

What has marked the new Pope Francis, the one «who comes from the end of the world», namely, from outside the European frame of reference, so charged with traditions, palaces, royal spectacles and internal power struggles, are the simple, popular gestures, obvious to those who appreciate a good common sense of life. Pope Francis is breaking protocols and showing that power is always a mask and theater, as sociologist Peter Berger pointed out so well, even when the power purports to be of divine origin.

Pope Francis simply obeys the command of Jesus of Nazareth who explicitly said that the great of this world give orders and dominate, “but it shall not be so among you: but whosoever will be great among you, shall be your minister: And whosoever of you will be the chiefest, shall be servant of all. For even the Son of Man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister” (Mark,10,43-45). Very well, if Jesus said that, how can the Pope, guarantor of His message, act otherwise?

Certainly with the establishment of the absolutist monarchy of the popes, especially beginning with the second millennium, the ecclesiastic institution inherited the symbols of Roman imperial power and of the feudal nobility: colorful clothing (such as the Cardinals’), tinsel, crucifixes and rings of silver and gold and palatial habits. In the great religious convents of the Middle Ages, life occurred in regal spaces.

In the room where I stayed, as a student, in the Franciscan Convent of Munich, that dates back to the times of William of Ockham (XIV century), one Renaissance painting on the wall was itself worth several thousand Euros. How can one reconcile the poverty of the Nazarene, who did not have a corner where to rest his head, with the miters, golden bishop’s staffs and the stoles and prince-like vestments of present day prelates? That is honestly not possible. And people who are not ignorant, but fine observers, notice the contradiction. All this ostentation has nothing to do with the Tradition of Jesus of Nazareth and His Apostles.

According to some newspaper accounts, when the Secretary of the Conclave tried to place on the shoulders of Pope Francis the «muceta», the little richly adorned cape, the symbol of papal power, Francis only said: “The carnival is over, put those clothes away”. And he appeared dressed in white, as did Dom Helder Camara, who left the colonial palace of Olinda and went to live under a humble roof in the Church of Las Candelas, in the periphery; as Cardinal Dom Paulo Evaristo Arns had done, not to mention Dom Pedro Casaldaliga, who lives in a poor little house, sharing the room with a guest.

To me, the most simple, honest and common gesture of Pope Francis was when he went to the hotel where he had stayed (he never stayed in the big central house of the Jesuits in Rome) to pay his bill of 90 Euros per day. Pope Francis walked in, and he personally gathered his clothes, packed his suitcase, greeted the staff of the hotel, and left. What civil potentate, opulent millionaire, what famous artist would do such thing? It would be a betrayal of the intent of the Bishop of Rome not to see in this gesture, so normal for all mortals, a populist intent.

Did he not do the same when he was the Cardinal of Buenos Aires and went to get the newspaper, went shopping, used the metro or the bus and preferred to introduce himself as, «father Bergoglio»?

Frei Betto coined an expression that is a great truth: «the head thinks from where the feet step». In effect, someone who always walks in palaces and sumptuous cathedrals, ends up thinking according to the logic of the palaces and cathedrals. For this reason, Pope Francis celebrated Sunday Mass in the Chapel of Saint Anne, inside the Vatican, considered the Roman parish of the Pope. And after Mass he went outside to greet the faithful.

It is worthy of note, and charged of theological content, that he did not present himself as the Pope, but as «the bishop of Rome». He asked for prayers not for the Emeritus Pope, Benedict XVI, but for the Emeritus Bishop of Rome, Joseph Ratzinger. With this Francis retook the most primordial tradition of the Church, that of considering the Bishop of Rome «first among equals». Because Peter and Paul were buried there, Rome acquired special preeminence. But that symbolic and spiritual power was exercised in the style of charity, and not as juridical power over the other Churches, as occurred in the second millennium. I will not be at all surprised if, as John Paul I had wanted, Francis decided to leave the Vatican and go live in a simpler place, with a great exterior space to receive the visits of the faithful. The time is ripe for this type of revolution in papal customs. And what a challenge is presented for the other prelates of the Church to live in voluntary simplicity and shared sobriety.

Leonardo Boff

Translation from the Spanish sent by
Melina Alfaro, volar@fibertel.com.ar,
done at REFUGIO DEL RIO GRANDE, Texas, EE.UU.

Was the Collapse of this Theology the Main Reason for the Resignation of Benedict XVI?

Leonardo Boff10 Comentários

It is always risky to choose a theologian to be pope. He can turn his particular theology into the universal theology of the Church and impose it on the whole world. I suspect this has been the case with Benedict XVI, first as a Cardinal, appointed Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, (ex-Inquisition), and later, chosen as Pope. This was not legitimate and became the source of unjust condemnations. In effect, he condemned more than one hundred men and women theologians, for not being in tune with his theological reading of the Church and of the world.

Reasons of health and feelings of impotence in the face of the gravity of the crisis in the Church led him to resign. But not only that. The text of his resignation speaks of the “diminution of vigor of the body and of the spirit” and of “his incapacity” to confront the questions that made the exercise of his mission difficult. Behind these words, I believe there hides the more profound reason for his resignation: the awareness of the collapse of his theology and of the failure of the model of Church he wanted to implement. An absolutist monarchy is not so absolute that it can overcome the inertia of the aged curial structures.

The central theses of his theology were always problematic for the theological community. Three of them ended up being rebutted by the facts: the concept of the Church as a «small reconciled world»; that the City of Men only acquires value before God by going through the mediation of the City of God, and the famous «subsistit» that means: only in the Catholic Church does the true Church of Christ subsist, no other Churches can be called Churches. This narrow conception comes from a sharp intelligence that is hostage to itself, not having sufficient intrinsic strength or the necessary following to be implemented. Did Benedict recognize this collapse and coherently resign? There are reasons for this hypothesis.

The Pontiff Emeritus found in Saint Augustine his teacher and inspiration. In fact, Augustine was the subject of personal conversations with him. From Saint Augustine he took his basic perspective, starting from his theory of original sin (transmitted by the sexual act of procreation). This causes all of humanity to be a «condemned mass». But inside humanity, God, through Christ, set up a saving cell, represented by the Church. The Church is «a small reconciled world» that carries the representation (Vertretung) of the rest of the lost humanity. It is not necessary for the Church to have many members. A few suffice, so long as they are pure and holy. Ratzinger incorporated this vision. He complemented it with the following reflection: the Church is made up of Christ and the twelve apostles. This is why she is apostolic. She is just this small group. This excludes the disciples, the women, and the masses that followed Jesus of Nazareth. To him, they do not count. They are reached by the representation (Vertretung) that «the small reconciled world» assumes. This eclesiastical model does not take into consideration the vast globalized world. Benedict wanted to make Europe into «the reconciled world» to again conquer humanity. He failed because no-one undertook this project, and it was even ridiculed.

The second thesis is also taken from Saint Augustine and his reading of history: the confrontation between the City of God and the City of Men. In the City of God there is grace and salvation: she is the only path that leads to salvation. The City of Men is built by human effort. But, since it is already contaminated by humanism and her other values, it does not obtain salvation because it has not passed through the mediation of the City of God (the Church). This is why she is plagued by relativism. Consequently Cardinal Ratzinger harshly condemned the Theology of Liberation, because it sought liberation by the poor themselves, and made the poor the autonomous subjects of their own history. But since the Theology of Liberation was not created within the City of God and her cell, the Church, it is insufficient and vain.

The third is a very personal interpretation that Benedict gives to Vatican Council II when talking of the Church of Christ. The first Counciliar draft said that the Catholic Church is the Church of Christ. The debates searching for ecumenism, changed is to subsists, to make room for other Christian Churches that, in their own way, also realize the Church of Christ. This interpretation, as maintained in my doctoral dissertation, earned an explicit condemnation from Cardinal Ratzinger in his famous document Dominus Jesus, (2000), where he affirms that subsists comes from «subsistence» that there can be only one, and it is found in the Catholic Church. The other «churches» present «solely» ecclesiastic elements. This «solely» is an arbitrary attachment he makes to the official text of the Council. Some notable theologians and I, myself, have shown that this essentialist reading does not exist in Latin. The meaning is always concrete: «to have body», «to objectively realize». This was the «sensus Patrum», the meaning of the Fathers of the Council.

These three central theses have been refuted by the facts: inside the «small reconciled world» there are too many pedophiles, even among the Cardinals, and thieves of money from the Vatican Bank. The second, that the City of Men does not have saving gravity in front of God, is built on the error of limiting the action of the City of God solely to the realm of the Church. Within the City of Men the City of God is also found, not in the form of religious consciousness but in the form of ethics and humanitarian values. Vatican Cuncil II guaranteed autonomy to the terrestrial realities (another name for secularization) that have value independently of the Church. They are of value to God. The City of God (the Church) is realized by the explicit faith, by the celebration and by the sacraments. The City of Men is realized by ethics and politics.

The third, that the Catholic Church is the unique and exclusive Church of Christ and, even worse, that outside of her there is no salvation, a medieval thesis resurrected by Cardinal Ratzinger, was simply ignored as offensive by other Churches. Instead of «outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation», in the discourse of popes and theologians was introduced, «the universal offer of salvation to all human beings and the world».

I have a serious suspicion that this failure and the collapse of his theological structure took away his “necessary vigor of body and spirit” to the point, as he confesses, of “feeling incapable of exercising his ministry”. Captive to his own theology, he had no alternative other than to honestly resign.

Free translation from the Spanish sent by
Melina Alfaro, alfaro_melina@yahoo.com.ar,
done at REFUGIO DEL RIO GRANDE, Texas, EE.UU.