Pope Francis and the people

When he was archbishop of Buenos Aires, Jorge Mario Bergoglio loved to spend time among the people. He was beloved in the “villas miseria”, the slums of Buenos Aires he often visited. He was appreciated by the people because, during protests at the time of the economic crisis, he came out to talk to them.  He was feared by the political power because of his homilies. Jorge Mario Bergoglio made of his being “callejero de la fé” (an urban grassroots advocate of the faith) the center of his pastoral activity. Once elected Pope, he immediately wanted to show his closeness to the people. He asked several times for all to pray for him. He spent hours greeting ill people at the end of the general audiences. His simple, almost simplistic, oratory is disarming and impacting. This is what the cardinals were calling for at the General Congregation, i.e. the pre-conclave meetings: a change of narrative of the Catholic Church, and a new missionary push. In a world where projecting the right image is so important, a good rapport with the people is crucial. On this basis, Pope Francis has built a tremendous popular and media consensus. However, he has also given rise to many expectations yet to be fulfilled.

Pope Francis and the local Churches

Pope Francis considers his being a bishop and a priest to be at the core of his activity. Since the very beginning, he wanted to call himself “bishop of Rome”, rather than Pope. And he has always stressed that he wants bishops and priests who are shepherds, who smell like the sheep they tend to. These shepherds will be entrusted by the Pope with the Keys of the Kingdom.

The image of Roman Curia was stained by scandals when the conclave began. Often, the scandals were the outcome of well-managed media campaigns, as the famous Vatileaks (which put the finger in the wound of the problems without really dissecting them).

There were some at the general congregations who were unhappy with some aspects of the previous papacy. Every bishop or nuncio visiting Rome wanted to have a private meeting with the Pope. Benedict XVI gave his collaborators a hard and fast rule: you can schedule a personal meeting only if it is really important and if a lot of personal attention is needed. Otherwise, better to report in writing. It was a democratic method, which avoided any favoritism. However, bishops in Rome for ad limina visits felt ostracized when they did not managed to have a personal audience with the Pope. The diplomats and the cardinals who were not granted a personal appointment often complained as well.

The complaints were mostly against the secretary Georg Gaenswein and the Secretary of State, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, because of the way they managed the Pope’s schedule and relations. Not by chance, both Bertone and Gaenswein had been the main targets of Vatileaks, and had been the only ones that Benedict XVI publicly defended.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio shared the local Churches concerns, in part as a result of personal experience. In his capacity of archbishop of Buenos Aires and primate of the Church in Argentina, Jorge Mario Bergoglio proposed many priests as bishops, but he got several ‘no’ from Rome. Cardinal Bergoglio also had to put up a fight to appoint his friend Victor Fernandez as Rector of the Catholic University of Buenos Aires, overcoming the Congregation for Catholic Education objecting to the appointment. Bergoglio raised these issues during the general congregations, asking for more autonomy and weight for the local Churches.

Now, the Pope is thinking about giving more decision-making power to bishops. From the interview the Pope granted to “La Civiltà Cattolica” emerged the notion of a possible “dismantling” of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. And Cardinal Kasper’s address at the consistory for the family highlighted the idea of entrusting to some local priests (experienced shepherds) the responsibility of deciding on annulments. Pope Francis has also let it confidentially be known that, if necessary, Canon law itself may be changed.

In the meantime, local Churches are the most engaged in the notion of a reform of the Curia. The Council of Eight cardinals is composed of people coming from the dioceses of the world, with the sole exception of Cardinal Giuseppe Bertello, President of the Governorate of Vatican City State. Until now, discussions on the reform of the Curia has mostly been with Bishops’ conferences. Members of the Roman Curia, as well as experts in ecclesiastical affairs, have been involved in the consultations, but only on their personal capacities.

Meanwhile, the local Churches are trying to be attentive to the Pope’s perspectives, while keeping their own approaches and autonomy. The German Bishops’ Conference elected as its president card. Reinhard Marx, the rising star of Pope Francis pontificate. On the other hand, the Italian Bishops’ Conference is going through a tough period: linked to the Pope, who is the primate of the Church of Italy, the Italian bishops want the Pope to continue to exercise the role of leader and guide. In the past, the pope would elect the president of the Italian Bishops’ Conference. But now, Francis wants its bishops to decide by themselves. It is possible there will be a show down in May, when the bishops of Italy will gather in their annual general assembly. Pope Francis will personal give the initial address to bishops, a premiére. The president of the Italian Bishops Conference Angelo Bagnasco is now marginalized.

Pope Francis and the reform of the Curia

That of the reform of the Roman Curia is one of the greatest expectations raised by the election of  Pope Francis. He himself admitted that he does not have his own plan of government. Rather, he is just following the guidelines of the General Congregations. The discussion in the General Congregations brought the idea that the Curia had to be streamlined. But how?

Pope Francis appointed a group of eight cardinal-consultants, and then put everything under review: he established a pontifical commission for the Institute for Religious Works (IOR), he then established another pontifical commission for the financial structure of the Holy See. After three meetings of the Council of Cardinals, he understood that a reform needs a project, and that a project requires a long journey. So, it seems, he decided instead to carry on the reform with a series of quick runs. He established a Secretary for the Economy. In the beginning Pope Francis just appointed its prefect (Cardinal George Pell), then he appointed a Secretary Prelate (his personal Secretary, Alfred Xuereb, who is also the Pope’s delegate for the two pontifical commissions) and finally he appointed the 15 members of the Council for the Economy.

The new dicastery still lacks its statues, and it is still not known where it will be inserted within the Roman Curia. This is a secondary issue for Pope Francis. It is worth noting that the chirograph that established the Council of Eight Cardinals has been published only shortly before the cardinals first met in the Vatican. Pope Francis, it seems, thinks that the institutionalization can come after.

According to Cardinal Julian Herranz, President Emeritus of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, the reform «will be quick and will be deep.» This would indicate that Canon Law experts will be consulted only after the fact, in order to give a juridical shape to a new status quo.

In the meantime, the Vatican hired several international companies as external consultants, which are explaining what everybody in the Vatican already knows, i.e. that the elephantine Vatican machine needs to be streamlined.

Pope Francis did not, however, fired anyone in order to build up a new Vatican ruling class and develop a new project of Curia. He preferred opting for a general freeze on hiring and promotions. The risk is that the Vatican machine would be completely dismantled, instead of it being fix to make it effective in its relations with the world.

Pope Francis and the world

Pope Francis main diplomatic tool is prayer. This was clear from his very first speech to the diplomatic corps accredited to the Holy See. In that occasion, he did not addressed the “big themes” of the pontifical diplomacy, probably taking as a given that the line to follow is that developed by Benedict XVI and John Paul II before him. In all the personal meetings he has had with heads of State or government, Pope Francis has highlighted a mutual commitment for world peace, against human trafficking, and in favor of a culture of the encounter. Pope Francis leaves relations with the diplomats to his Secretary of State, Cardinal Pietro Parolin, a skilled diplomat himself. In his presentation speech to the ambassadors to the Holy See, Parolin explained his goal to engage in a path of dialogue based on personal acquaintance. That diplomacy is not the core of this pontificate is evident. According to several rumors, the diplomatic responsibilities of the Secretariat of State will be tasked to just one of the Secretariats that Pope Francis may be thinking to establish. General affairs (first section) would cease to exist, and its functions would fall to a “moderator curiae”, i.e. a coordinating office.

Some issues (even if complex) are noteworthy: the Pope is the Holy See, not the main representative of the Holy See. This is the reason why the Secretariat of State (i.e. the secretariat of the Pope) held both the tasks of general affairs and diplomacy: to underscore the identification of the Pope with the diplomatic activity of the Church. Will this eventual change lead to a weaker and less influential diplomacy? And how will papal nuncios and missionaries be supported if in the Holy See diplomacy would become just one of the many offices of the new Roman Curia? All of these concerns must be discussed.

Meanwhile, Pope Francis stresses the diplomatic strength of prayer. The vigil for peace in Syria held on September 7 was an extraordinary success. Pope Francis thus walks on the path of his predecessors, since the Popes have always been committed to peace. On the other hand, some questions may arise: how much did the impact of the vigil on public opinion stopped a U.S.  military intervention in Syria? John Paul II’s charisma, his similar call for a day of prayer and fasting, were not sufficient to avoid the Second Gulf War… so, is the Church really heard in the international arena? Or has it become ever more marginalized?

The Pope is not a pop star

These are all critical issues, and would concern every modern pontificate, not just that of Francis. A missionary push is needed. The challenge is not to dilute the faith, but to rise up to the challenges of the world with a culture, with wisdom, and with a set identity. After one year of pontificate, Pope Francis has grabbed newspapers headlines, and he will perhaps be the first pope to win the Nobel Prize. It is worth noting that, for instance, “Time magazine” motivations to elect Pope Francis the person of the year were more the result of a political agenda and an ideological vision of Pope Francis’ actions than a precise analysis of what Pope Francis has been doing.

In fact, Pope Francis has proven to be firmly orthodox. He did not want a direct fight against the spirit of the world. But it is enough to read Evangelii Gaudium, his Apostolic exhortation, to understand that his positions on the ethics themes follow the Church’s tradition. And it suffices to read his daily morning homilies delivered at Domus Sanctae Marthae to understand that the Church’s tradition is alive in Pope Francis (he makes many references to Confession, to the hierarchical Church, to salvation and the Church).

Perhaps there has been a revolution of the Church’s image. It is yet to be seen how much of this revolution has been propitiated by the media, rather than generated by Pope Francis’ actions. Perhaps there is too much marketing, and not enough substance, around Pope Francis’ message. He is very aware that in the end he must watch out for the risk of simply becoming something akin to a pop star. This is the most difficult challenge Pope Francis will need to confront. 

His reform is something more similar to Gregory VII. That of Gregorian reform is an heroic enterprise, brought on by a few man that works to re-moralized their society and so purify the Church. People gathered around Ildebrando of Soana begins a movement whose effect were so vast that a whole world change. Will this happen with the Benedict XVI’s Papacy?

Elected Pope with the name of Gregory VII, Ildebrando do not only care about the purification and moralization of the Church. He also collect the ancient sources, so creating a corpus of papers that will be the first global law of the world, the Canon Law. More, he defends the autonomy of the Church. In Dictatus Papae, Gregory VII affirms the supremacy of the Pope on any other power, the imperial one included. Then, he organizes the Pontifical Legates network. He establishes two kind of Pontifical Legates: the one in loco, charged by the Pope to look after the application of Gregorian reform on a territory; and the one sent by  Rome to accomplish mission in a foreign countries. The defense of the autonomy and sovereignty of the Church is also brought on, during the Gregorian Age, by creating new canonic collection. Gregory VII auspicates the research of the sources of the law, and so many researchers look for documents that affirms that the Papal authority is the source of the law. This research will bring to light the writings of Attone, Anselm from Lucca, Deusdedit.

It is the work Benedict XVI is doing as well. Joseph Ratzinger began his theological research with his Doctoral thesis on the «People of God and House of God in Saint Augustine’s Doctrine of the Church» – defended in 1951 -, and he has always been aware that he needed to look back to the Church, and then he understood that the Church needed to be less worldy, and that being less wordly means to change and unify. Finally, the Canon Law is the tool that the Church has to do it.

Benedict XVI wants to focus on Canon Law, and this is one of the reasons why the Secretary of State is a Canonist and the last Papal nuncios appointed is Charles J. Brown, a non diplomat that served for years in the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. This comeback of the Canon Law is driving the Benedict XVI’s choice for what concern international relations, and even for what concern its commitment for financial transparency. This led to a renewed Vatican anti-money laundering law. Not everybody had been happy about it, inside and outside the Vatican Walls. Why?

The new text of anti-money laundering Vatican Law come into effect

There had been no modification to the Decree n. 159 issued by the Pontifical Commission for Vatican City State. The last 25th of January, Holy See issued the decree n. 159 to amend the Vatican City State Law n. 127 concerning the countering of money laundering and financing of terrorism. As the art. 7 of the Fundamental Law of Vatican City State, the President of the Pontifical Commission for Vatican City State  «in cases of urgent necessity, he can issue dispositions having the force of law, which  however lose their force if they are not confirmed by the Commission within ninety days». The Commission confirmed the decree and – beyond whatever it has been written and told during these last three months – there were no doubts about it.

Anti money-laundering Vatican law: a never ending debate

Ever since the Law n. 127 had been issued, the Governatorate knew that this law had been written in a hurry, under the pressure of the investigation of the Public Prosecutor of Rome on two money transfer ordered by the I.O.R. (the Institute for Religious Works), and with the necessity to fully comply to the norms required by the European Union in the Monetary Convention signed by the Holy See in 2009. Yet while Holy See and European Union were discussing the terms of the Monetary Convention, the then number two of Vatican City State Carlo Maria Viganò showed himself doubtful about what the on-going discussion was going to ask to the Holy See, and proposed to unhook the Holy See by Euro area, in order to preserve its sovereignty.

The law n. 127 reassured Italian prosecutors, but on the other hand it did not completely fit to the international standards. The decree was an improvement of the law promoted by the Vatican City State administration in order to fit to international standards and at the same time to let them adhere to a peculiar State that is Vatican City State, while preserving the Holy See sovereignty.

An Italian problem?

Yet, during these last three months, Italian medias highlighted several rumors coming from «inside the Vatican» against the improvement of the law 127. Il Fatto Quotidiano – one of the most prominent and aggressive Italian newspaper – published a series of leaks of reserved documents. Among these documents, there was also an e-mail sent by the Director of the Authority for Financial Information Francesco De Pasquale (the controller) to the president of the Council of Superintendency of the I.O.R. (the controlled). This documents proved a questionable relationship between two parts of the mechanism of control of the Holy See, and at the same time proved that an animated debate took place within the Sacred Walls about the improvement of the Vatican Law n. 127.

It had been also leaked to Il Fatto Quotidiano a notation by cardinal Attilio Nicora, president of the Authority for Financial Information (but also member of the Council of Superintendecy of the I.O.R., member of the Commission for the Governatorate of Vatican City State and member of the so-called Council of 15, the assembly of 15 cardinals that periodically meet to take stock of the Vatican financial situation). In this notation, Nicora described the amendments to the Law n. 127 as “step behind” confronting with the previous text, which he blessed and promoted. More. The last March, the 19th, an article published on Il Corriere della Sera, the most spread Italian newspaper, let understand that Nicora himself was working to rewrite the text of the decree n.159, in order to bring the law back to the “old” law n. 127. The article proved that – inside the Vatican – the debate never ended.

Why the anti-money laundering law changed

The amendments to the Law n.127 had been requested by the advisors of MONEYVAL, the body of the Council of Europe that analyze and judge the adherence of the States to the 40+9 GAFI recommendations for contrasting money laundering and financing of terrorism. Marcello Condemi, a member of the Vatican Authority for Financial Information and draftsman of the first sketch of the old law n. 127, worked on a second sketch of the law right after the first on site visit of the MONEYVAL advisors in Vatican, that took place in November 2011. Several debates within the Sacred Walls followed. Finally, with the decree n. 159, the law n. 127 had been essentially modified. The “new” law n. 127 is now more adherent to international standard. It strengthens the power of controlling of the Authority for Financial Information, but at the same time distributed the controlling powers on several bodies of the Holy See, according to the principle of the separation of powers (even the Gendarm Corps is now encouraged to strengthen its intelligence in order to take part to the countering of money laundering with proper tools of investigation).  It gave to the Vatican Secreteriat of State the complete management of the relationships between States – «The Secretariat of State – it is written in the decree n. 159, art. 2 quinquies – foster the adhesion of the Holy See to treaties and international agreements, as well as the relations and the participation of the Holy See to institution and international organization qualified to define norms and good practices for what concerns the prevention and countering of money laundering and financing of terrorism».

That the effort of the Holy See had been to adhere to international standards for what concerns the countering of money laundering without denaturalize its own institution is evident when – in the decree n. 159 – the procedures to take into consideration the list of terror organizations issued by the Security Council of United Nations. According to the law n. 127, Holy See does not mechanically transpose the United Nations Lists. This choice is aimed to preserve the Holy See and Vatican neutrality. In fact, lists are written under the «Chapter 7» of Charter of the United Nations, and that Chapter is applied in war time. Holy See could be embarrassed by a mechanical transposition of the lists, since it could be in contradiction with the Holy See orientation –  Holy See is traditionally neutral and in favor of peace. Since Holy See is a Permanent Observer to the Assembly of United Nations, and not a Full Member, a settlement has been made to the autonomy of the Holy See: the Vatican Secretariat of State – according to the new article 24 of the law n. 127– will draw up its own list of terror organizations that will be based on the one issued by the United Nations, so keeping its autonomy, and at the same time showing to be sensitive to the international security goals. Holy See so maintain its autonomy, but at the same time proves sensibility to the international security goal .

Is there a biggest target?

Maybe there is a biggest target on the basis of the polemics that followed the one the another from the moment in which the Holy See began the process enrolled in the «White List», the list of states most active in preventing and fighting the financial crimes.. The critics to the lack of transparency of Vatican finance would hide a sort of attack to the sovereignty of the Holy See itself. Documents leaked by the press – the so-called Vatileaks, that are now under the investigation of a commission made up of the cardinals Herranz, De Giorgi and Tomko – prove that the «sovereignty issue» has never been taken into consideration by the «step behind» theorists. The leaks are about the retroactivity of the «new» law n. 127; about the will to cooperate with Italian investigators; about a diligence toward Italian authorities that led Ettore Gotti Tedeschi to be voluntarily questioned by the Italian magistrates without these latter submitted the request internationally.

Yet, Paolo Cipriani, General Director of the Institute for Religious Works, explained – during one of the seminars periodically held by the I.O:R. to train the administrators of the Congregation with deposits in the «Vatican bank» – that the Institute has always responded to any request submitted by Prosecutors or Central Banks. The responses by the Holy See, Cipriani explained, had come formally – there had been during the last ten years 20 requests submitted internationally to the Holy See (it is a global data, it does not concerns the only I.O.R.): 19 had been fulfilled by the Vatican City State, the last one has been judged by a Vatican Court – and not formally, for a sort of «good neighborhood relationships» with the other financial institutes. Holy See – Cipriani also underlined – did not answer in the only case the request would be considered a vulnus to its sovereignty.

A wider – international – perspective

It is now time to see things from a wider perspective. The announcement of the improvement of the law n. 127 has been launch in the Osservatore Romano, the newspaper of the Holy See, in an article by msgr. Dominique Mamberti, the «foreign minister» of the Holy See. Mamberti linked the news of the improvement of the law n. 127 to the ratification by the Holy See of three international threaties – the news about the ratification had been given the 25th of January as well. Holy See adhered to and ratified the International Convention for the Suppression of the financing of terrorism(Onu, New York, 1999) and the United Nations Conventions against the transnational organized crime (Palermo, 2000). Holy See also announced the ratification of the United Nations Convention against illicit traffic in narcotics drugs and psychotropic substances (Wien, 1998): this latter Convention had been already signed by the Holy See when it had been adopted by United Nations.

It’s a long time that the campaigns to expell Holy See by the concert of Nations – as the See Change campaign – broke down in the public opinion. In 2007, The Economist – one of the most authoritative magazines in the world – published an article headlined “God’s ambassadors” about the Vatican diplomacy. The article ended with this advice for the Holy See: «It could renounce its special diplomatic status and call itself what it is – the biggest non-governmental organization in the world».

Within the bureaus of the United Nations and of the other major international organization in which the Holy See seats as an observer, the idea to expel Holy See from the concert of nations is widely spreads. Even if this idea did not succed, and – on the other hand – on July 2004 the General Assembly of United Nations approved a resolution that not only confirm, but even enhanced the presence of the Holy See within the United Nations.

So, a more subtle strategy began. This strategy – brought on in international environments – aims to undermine the moral power of the Catholic Church and of religions in general. It consists in remarking that religious freedom is something like the freedom of expression, or in confusing the religious freedom with the freedom of worship. Vatican diplomacy is undermined, too. If Italian Prime Minister Mario Monti caused an «earthquake» at the Italian Ministry for Foreign Affair by showing his intention to appoint ambassadors not raised up with a diplomatic career, Vatican insiders refer about the intention to appoint lay people as diplomatic representative of the Holy See. Pontifical Legates must be bishops, since they represent the Pope. This rule is valid and effective only for Papal nuncios: they work as Papal ambassadors, they keep relationships with the governments, and at the same time they work as bishops, speaking to the Episcopal Conferences of the countries they are appointed at, give their opinion about the to-be-appointed bishops.

Nuncios that are appointed as permanent observer within the International organizations (United Nations, U.N.E.S.C.O., F.A.O., European Parliament) must only care the relationships between the Holy See and the governments. This would open to the appointment of lay people as permanent observers of the Holy See.

Could this be the beginning of a weakening of the Vatican diplomacy? In the book C’era una volta un Vaticano (Once upon a time a Vatican), Massimo Franco, underlines this lack of international appeal of the Holy See. Too appeased on Italy and on its relations with Italy – Massimo Franco writes .- the Holy See lost sight of its wide global horizon that made of it the most long-lived and solid institution in the world. Canon right is the first really global and globalized law of the history, and it still consists in a solidity that no friendly diplomatic relations would touch.

This same problem spoiled the path to the Vatican financial transparency. Holy See borders are not anymore with Italy, but with the whole Europe. Yet, the members of the Authority for Financial Information are all Italian, coming from the Bank of Italy milieau – even if the Bank of Italy proved a certain hostility toward the Holy See (the investigation of the Roman prosecutors undermined the Holy See sovereignty, since prosecutors asked for information to the Financial Intelligence Unit of the Bank of Italy – which should be independent – instead of investigating with the Guardia di Finanza).

The “old” law n. 127 would have probably solved the “judicial” problems with Italy, but certainly it would also set back – if not avoided – the Holy See path to the white list. The Plenary Assembly of MONEYVAL will meet the next July, and on that occasion the report about Holy See will be issued. It will not be at that moment that the Council of Europe will decide about the enlistment – or the not enlistment – of the Holy See among the virtuous States. But probably, the possibility to be part of the white list would have been more difficult without the improvement of the law n. 127, that the MONEYVAL advisors auspicated.

The Pope speaks of darkness and light. «The darkness that poses a real threat to mankind, after all, is the fact that he can see and investigate tangible material things, but cannot see where the world is going or whence it comes, where our own life is going, what is good and what is evil». «The darkness enshrouding God and obscuring values is the real threat to our existence and to the world in general». «If God and moral values, the difference between good and evil, remain in darkness, then all other “lights”, that put such incredible technical feats within our reach, are not only progress but also dangers that put us and the world at risk». «Today we can illuminate our cities so brightly that the stars of the sky are no longer visible. Is this not an image of the problems caused by our version of enlightenment?» «With regard to material things, our knowledge and our technical accomplishments are legion, but what reaches beyond, the things of God and the question of good, we can no longer identify».

Jesus came to illuminate the world. But it seems that the whole Church is living in darkness. The darkness is made up also by those who disobey the Church, who confuse the renovation with the disobedience, who – maybe unconsciously, probably consciously – break the Union of the Church. Benedict XVI remembered it during the Chrism Mass, on Holy Thursday. Holy Thursday is the day Jesus shared his priesthood with the apostles, and the Pope uses the occasion to ask all priests, including himself, to meditate upon what their consecration really means. The Pope asked: «Are you resolved to be more united with the Lord Jesus and more closely conformed to him», which entails a renunciation of oneself and «of the much-vaunted self-fulfillment»? Being Christ-like means not to be served but to serve, not taking but giving, he said. If that is the nature of the priesthood, then what should be the response of priests when faced with «the often dramatic situation of the Church today». Then, without specifying the country, Pope Benedict said a group of priests from a European nation have issued a call for disobedience of Church teaching, specifically regarding the question of women’s ordination.

Last year the president of the Austrian bishops’ conference, Cardinal Christoph Schoenborn, condemned a «Call to Disobedience», signed by 250 of Austria’s 4,200 Catholic priests. The document urged Catholics to begin a campaign in support of women priests and «priestless Eucharistic liturgies», as well as for Communion to be given to non-Catholics and remarried divorcees. Also, 311 theologians from Austria, Germany and Switzerland signed a memorandum last year demanding the ordination of women and married men, as well as an «open dialogue» on the Church’s «structures of power and communication».

Pope Benedict asked: «Is disobedience a path of renewal for the church?». Then, he added hat Blessed John Paul II taught «irrevocably that the church has received no authority from the Lord» to ordain women. Pope Benedict said perhaps such campaigns are motivated by concern for the Church and believe that «the slow pace of institutions has to be overcome by drastic measures, in order to open up new paths and bring the church up-to-date». «But – the Pope then asked – is disobedience really a way to do this?». And the Pope concluded that true renewal must be based on lives that are radically conformed to Christ and God’s will.

The search for Jesus was topical in Joseph Ratzinger’s research. This is the reason why, to crown in a proper manner a brilliant career as theologian, Ratzinger thought that he had to write a book about the ‘historical’ Jesus according to Gospels. Once he had been elected Pope, the plan did not change. He already published two parts of his work (the uprising will be about the Gospel of the Infancy). The second part of Jesus of Nazareth by Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI is about Holy Week: from the Entrance to Jerusalem to the Resurrection. Re-reading some extracts of the book is a way to have an accurate picture of this Pontificate and of its guidelines.

The coena Domini according to Joseph Ratzinger

«The breach of friendship extends into the sacramental community of the Church, where people continue to take ‘his bread’ and to betray him. Jesus agony, his struggle against death, continues until the end of the world, as Blaise Pascal said on the basis of similar considerations. We can also put it in the other way around: at this hour, Jesus took upon himself the betrayal of all ages, the pain cause by betrayal in every era, and he endured the anguish of history to the bitter end».

Last Supper. Judas is going to betray Jesus. How many times the Church has been betrayed? How many times the Benedict XVI’s Pontificate itself has been «stabbed» in the back? Some example: during the first months of the Benedict XVI’s pontificate, the translations of his speeches and lectios were delivered in considerable late. Then, an entire – and relevant – part of his magisterium has been kept hidden, since it has not been covered by media. The same medias highlight the “utter chatters” of several «Judas» that break the friendship, and whose breach extends into the sacramental community of the Church. This is the deep reason of Confession. Benedict XVI explained it when he went to visit the prison of Rebibbia, in Rome. Giovanni, one of the prisoners, asked the Pope why he would need to be absolved for his sins by a priest. «If I think I badly behaved – I made people suffer – and I get on my knees in the front of God, and I beg for His forgiveness, would he absolve me? » Benedict XVI answered that, yes, God would absolve him, but  that the sin does not only deal with a «vertical dimension, it is not just about the relationship with God. Sin also has an horizontal, social dimension. If I make sins – even if I am not aware of it – I also damage the community of the faithful. So, the sin is not only personal, but it also deals with society. This is the reason why I need absolution».

It is the same absolution Judas is not able to reach for. If anything, because he does not think that he could eventually be forgiven. «His second tragedy, after the betrayal – Ratzinger writes – is that he can no longer believe in forgiveness. His remorse turns into despair. Now he sees only himself and his darkness; he no longer sees the light of Jesus, which can illumine and overcome the darkness. He shows us the wrong type of remorse: the type that is unable to hope, that sees only its own darkness, the type that is destructive and in no way authentic».

How can a Catholic be like Judas? The Gospel of John – Ratzinger notices – «does not offer any psychological interpretation of Judas’ conduct. The only clue he gives is a hint that Judas had helped himself to the contents of the disciples’ money box, of which he had charge (12:6). In the context we are interested about, the evangelist merely says laconically: “Then, after the morsel, Satan entered into him” (13:27)»

In summary, for John «what happened to Judas is beyond psychological explanation. He has come under the dominion of another. Anyone who breaks off friendship with Jesus, casting off his ‘easy joke’, does not attain liberty, does not become free, but succumbs to other powers. To put it another way, he betrays this friendship because he is in the grip of another power to which he has opened himself”».

The liberty Ratzinger is writing about come only from being disciples of Jesus, as he also underlined during the Chrism Mass on the last Good Thursday.  This thought is at the basis of Joseph Ratzinger’s Papal Magisterium. And this Magisterium has a specific goal: to turn back the man to God.

Pilate according to Joseph Ratzinger

Who was Pontius Pilate? Only the Gospel of Johh tells about the dialogue between Pilate and Jesus. Only John deeply depicts who was Pilate. Who is Pontius Pilate? Everyone of us can be Pontius Pilate, Joseph Ratzinger explains in his Jesus of Nazaret. Benedict XVI also talked about Pilate in the homily in Plaza de la Revoluciòn at La Habana, Cuba. In the Passion according to Joseph Ratzinger, the “character” of Pilate is also a paradigm of our times.

«The image of Pilate in the gospels – Benedict XVI writes – presents the Roman Prefect quite realistically as a man who could be brutal when he judged this to be in the interest of the public order. Yet he also knew that Rome owed its world dominance not least to its tolerance of foreign divinities and to the capacity of Roman law to build peace. This is how he come across us during Jesus’ trial».

Pragmatic, conscious that the Roman dominance was also owed to the Roman tolerance of different faiths, surprised that Jews – i.e. the aristocracy of the Temple – presented to him as friends of Rome asking for his intervention (an intervention he did not deem necessary, since he knew that Jesus was not a revolutionary leader), Pilate probably considered Jesus as a religious fanatic, maybe a violator of Judaic principles – which he was not interested about.

Here is Jesus in the front of Pilate. «So, are you a king?»; Pilate asks. And Jesus answers: «You do say it. I am a king». But the Jesus’ kingship – Jesus has said previously – «is not of this world. If my kingship were of this world, my servants would fight, that I  might not handed over to the Jews».

«This ‘confession’ of Jesus – Ratzinger writes – places Pilate in an extraordinary situation: the accused claims kingship and kingdom (basileìa). Yet he underlines the complete otherness of this kingship, and he even makes the particular point that must have been decisive for the Roman judge: no one is fighting for this kingship. If power, indeed military power, is characteristic of kingship and kingdoms, there is no sign of it in Jesus’ case. And neither is there any threat to Roman order».

Which are the Jesus’ kingship characteristic? «This kingdom – the Pope writes – is powerless. It has no legion. With these words Jesus created a thoroughly new concept of kingship and kingdom, and he held it up to Pilate, the representative of classical wordly power». Jesus goes over: to make the essence and the particular character of the power of this kingship, he does not speaks about authority, but he bears witness to the truth is the essence of his regality.

«What is truth?» The pragmatic Pilate’s question remain unanswered. It is a topical question in political argument and in discussion of foundations of the law. «It is – the Pope writes – the question that is also asked by modern political theory: can politics accept truth in a structural category? Or must truth, as something unattainable, be relegated to the subjective sphere, its place taken by an attempt to build peace and justice using whatever instruments are available to  power? By relying on truth, does not politics, in view of the impossibility of attaining consensus on truth, make itself a tool of particular tradition that in reality are merely forms of holding on the power? What would be a world without truth?»

Yet, Pilate dismiss this question as unanswerable. In the course of his conversation with Jesus, it becomes abundantly clear that Jesus is not a rebel, and his message and his activities pose no threat for the Roman rules. Pilate still fears that perhaps there is something really divine in Jesus. Jews play off one fear against another and – Ratzinger writes – «they appeal to the entire practical fear of forfeiting the emperor’s power, being removed from office, and thus plunging into a downward spiral. The declaration: “If you release this man, you are not Caesar’s friend” (Jn 19:12) is a threat».

Cooperatores veritatis (coworkers in truth) is the episcopal motto that Joseph Ratzinger chose. Truth divides, brings dissensions and difficulties. After revoking the excommunication to four lefevbrist bishops, Benedict XVI is attacked from the flak of the same bishops of Catholic Church. So he decides to write a letter to bishops, in the one he explains why some lack of thought happened, but he complains of his brothers ready «to bite and devour».

Was writing that letter the right thing to do, since it brought even more critics? Benedict XVI could have preferred peace, like Pontius Pilate did.  Pontius Pilate knew that Jesus was not a rebel. He knew the truth. But in the end «the concern for career proves stronger than fear for divine powers».

Resurrection according to Joseph Ratzinger

«Jesus has not returned to a normal human life in this world like Lazarus and the other whom Jesus raised from the dead. He has entered upon a different life, a new life – he has entered the vast breadth of God himself, and it is from there that he reveals himself to his followers».

Benedict XVI dedicated himself for months to the chapter about the Resurrection of Jesus. Resurrection is the key of Christianity. It is the entrance upon the vast breadth of God. Joseph Ratzinger’s thought is condensed in his words about Resurrection. Christianity is condensed in Resurrections.

Resurrection is something completely new, and Christian can only astonish about it. «For the disciples, too – Ratzinger writes – this was something utterly unexpected, to which they were only slowly able to adjust. Jewish faith indeed know about a resurrection of the dead at the end of time. New life was linked to the inbreaking of a new world and thus made complete sense. If there is a new world, then there is also a new mode of life there. But a resurrection into definitive otherness in the midst of the continuing old world was not foreseen and therefore at first made no sense. So the promise of resurrection remained initially unintelligible for the disciples».

Jesus makes everything new. Nobody had thought of a crucified Messiah, and «the fact was there – Ratzinger writes – and it was necessary, on the basis of that fact, to take a fresh look at Scripture». It is the process of theology that developed in all the eras. Theology – and Ratzinger knows it – is nothing more than the – always perfectible – try to tell the mystery of Jesus. This is the reason why the Pope let the magisterium loose from his books on Jseus of Nazareth.

The announcement of the novelty of the Gospel is topical for the Benedict XVI’s magisterium. Scripture yielded new insights in the light of the unexpected turn of events. «The new reading of the Scripture – Ratzinger writes – could begin only after the Resurrection, because it was only through Resurrection that Jesus was accredited as the one sent by God. Now people had to search the Scripture for both Cross  and Resurrection, so as to understand them in a new way and thereby come to believe in Jesus as the Son of God. This also presupposes the fact that for the disciples Resurrection was just as real as the Cross. It presupposes that they were simply overwhelmed by the reality that, after their initial hesitation and astonishment, they could no longer ignore reality. It is truly he. He is alive; he has spoken to us; he has allowed us to touch him, even if he no longer belongs to the realm of the tangible in the normal way».

One can interpret not only the Benedict XVI’s Papal magisterium, but even the extraordinary adventure of the theologian Joseph Ratzinger, as a search for the key to understand the mystery of resurrection and to interpret it through times, people and Church of today. This search began at the times of his thesis for certification to teach theology on Saint Bonaventure’s theology of history.

It was the times of Joachim of Fiore. In his works, he affirmed a Trinitarian rhythm of history. He considered the Old Testament as the age of the Father, followed by the time of the Son, the time of the Church. To be awaited yet was the third age, that of the Holy Spirit. Where did the hope for the arousal of a new time comes from? The answer of Joachim of Fiore is that it would come a new monasticism. In his view, St. Francis of Assisi was the initiator of the new time and in his order the community of the new period –- the community of the time of the Holy Spirit, which left behind it the hierarchical Church, to begin a new Church of the Spirit, no longer connected to the old structures. There was, hence, the risk of a very serious misunderstanding of the message of St. Francis, of his humble fidelity to the Gospel and to the Church, and such a mistake implied an erroneous vision of Christianity as a whole.

Bonaventure – Benedict XVI said in the 10 march 2010 general audience – addressed the problem. He knew that St. Francis and the new community he created, so different from the monasticism known up to then, called for a new interpretation; he understood that there was the practical need of structures and of insertion in the reality of the hierarchical Church, of the real Church, needed a theological foundation, also because the others, those who followed the spiritualist conception, showed an apparent theological foundation: he knows that – although taking into account the necessary realism – it was not necessary to lose the novelty of the figure of St. Francis”.

Bonaventure harmonized the positions: he remembers that Jesus Christ  is the last word of God, in him God has said all, giving and expressing himself -, but at the same time he underlines that  Church is not immobile, fixed in the past and that novelties cannot be exercised in her. “Opera Christi non deficiunt, sed proficiunt,” the works of Christ do not go backward, do not fail, but progress, says the saint in the letter De tribus quaestionibus. Christ is not the end of history. He is the center of history.

Bonaventure’s method – he harmonizes the novelty with Christ, the rebuilding with the adherence to Church, the fathers of the Church with modernity – is at the basis of Joseph Ratzinger’s method. From there, the extraordinary adventure of Pope Benedict XVI began.

Toward the year of Faith

And adventure that lead him to proclaim a Year of Faith,  whose climax will be a public profession Credo of the people of God that religious communities as well as parish communities, and all ecclesial bodies old and new are called to do (as indicated in the apostolic letter Porta Fidei). Benedict XVI explained what the deep sense of the Year of Faith in the homily of the Chrism Mass, on Good Thursday.

«The Year of Faith – he said – commemorating the opening of the Second Vatican Council fifty years ago, should provide us with an occasion to proclaim the message of faith with new enthusiasm and new joy. We find it of course first and foremost in sacred Scripture, which we can never read and ponder enough. Yet at the same time we all experience the need for help in accurately expounding it in the present day, if it is truly to touch our hearts. This help we find first of all in the words of the teaching Church: the texts of the Second Vatican Council and the Catechism of the Catholic Church are essential tools which serve as an authentic guide to what the Church believes on the basis of God’s word. And of course this also includes the whole wealth of documents given to us by Pope John Paul II, still far from being fully explored».

Catechism, Church’s documents, prayer: these are the key words for the Year of Faith. These are the key words of the Pontificate. A Pontificate that made of the Gospel its main topic. Ratzinger’s revolution has come.  A revolution whose symbol is Jesus of Nazaret, to whom Benedict XVI – not casually – already dedicated two books.