However, the beloved professor did not abandon them. He showed them the way. Fr. Stephan Horn, the president of the Schuelerkreis, met with Benedict at the beginning of June at the Vatican monastery where the Pope Emeritus resides. Pope Benedict confirmed to him that he would not take part in the Schulerkreis gathering. But he chose the theme for the meeting: «The question of God against the background of secularization.» He also chose the guest speaker: Remi Brague, a French theologian awarded last year with the Ratzinger Prize for Theology.

The theme is typically Benedict XVI’s. Since he was ordained priest, Joseph Ratzinger has reflected about the question of God against the background of secularization. As vice parish priest of the Church of the Most Precious Blood, Joseph Ratzinger listened to confessions very often.  He was ever more aware that there was a new paganism rising, that of people who called themselves Christians but were not, and lived as pagans. He wrote a book about it, «New Pagans and the Church.»

Looking back at that book can explain all of Benedict XVI’s work, from that of an intellectual and a theologian, passing through the years as bishop and then prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, to shepherd of the Universal Church.

Pope Benedict XVI often admonished about the eclipse of God. He did so, quoting Isaiah, in November 27, 2011, the first Sunday of Advent: «No one invokes your name, or makes an effort to take hold of you. For you have rejected us and handed us over to our own sins.» Benedict XVI cried out loud and with angst about the present times, and about a world of «anonymous cities» where «God seems to be absent, and the human being the only master, as if he were the author and maker of everything.»

It is in these cities where men may experience a sense of abandonment by God. In such a world that «seems almost perfect,» later on «disconcerting things occur, in nature or in society, and we think that God is something like retired, that He has in some way abandoned us to our own fate. In fact, the true master of the world is not man, but God.»

These themes have always been pivotal to Ratzinger’s thought. A major focus of his reflections is about a Europe that has put aside its identity and its faith. A Europe that must come to terms with this moral crisis, before its economic crisis. The Saturday before his lamenting cry, Benedict XVI had met with the plenary assembly of the Pontifical Council for the Laity. There, he underlined that «sometimes we have worked for a more incisive presence of Christians in society, in politics and economics, but perhaps we have not paid equal attention to the solidity of their faith.»

Benedict XVI has always called for «authentic Christians,» and this is why, in Germany in September, 2011, and in October, 2011 in Assisi, the Pope praised «agnostics for whom the question of God leave them unease, and are thus closer to the Kingdom of God than routine believers.» In essence, Benedict XVI was calling for a freer Church to believe in God.

Joseph Ratzinger’s students are well aware of all of this. They will nevertheless miss their mentor. As recalled by Fr. Joseph Fessio, publisher and founder of the Ignatius Press and one of the members of Schuelerkreis, Ratzinger had in every meeting «something new to say, something nobody had ever thought about before.»

Remi Brague should be well placed, however, to give the discussion the required historical-critical-rational background.

Historian, medievalist and an expert on the history of Religions, Brague was the first to contrast secularity with secularism. «The advocates of secularity – he stated in an interview posted at the digital commons OpenDemocracy – specifically want to, or pretend, ignore that it appeared in the Middle Ages, a period that was emphatically not secularist.» Brague added: «The dividing line drawn between the Church and the State is a Christian invention that began among the Church Fathers, as a reaction against Constantine’s claim to control the Church and further culminated in medieval times.» Moreover, Brague asserts –  «this line was drawn by the Church, not by the State. The Holy See’s constant policy from the Investiture Controversy in the late 11th century consisted in sending the State (i.e. the Emperor or the Kings) back to its own merely this worldly—“secular” if you want—task: enforcing peace, justice, good social order. The State, on the other hand, was not “secular”, but claimed its share in sacrality. Secularity was a conquest of the Church.»

Brague turns to etymology to explain the difference between secularity and secularism. «Secular comes from saeculum, the Latin for “century”, which originally meant the longest duration of human life. Secularity is the attitude of people who think that human hopes can’t exceed one century and therefore—perhaps unwittingly and unwillingly—act so that mankind will last exactly as long… Secularists are unable to explain why it is good that there should be human beings on earth. Since they contend that human life is the product of chance, they can’t tell us why it should be good for us, who can decide consciously to carry on with the experience, to do so.»  

These will be the foundations for what should be a lively debate. Maybe a part of this debate will also take place at the Mater Ecclesiae monastery. Because, while it is true that Benedict XVI will not take part in public events, he will probably celebrate the final Mass with his former pupils. In last years’ homily, he launched the idea that truth «cannot be possessed» and the Schulerkreis meeting gave impetus to the ecumenical relationships with Lutherans and the Orthodox. Perhaps the Schuelerkreis meeting this year will show the way to overcome the eclipse of God.

Just a few know the obscure work of Silvano Maria Tomasi, permanent observer of the Holy See to the United Nations in Geneva. Scalabrinian missionary, born in 1940, long-term diplomat, from his post of permanent observer he fights against the dictatorship of relativism, that is also maybe the favorite battlefield of Benedict XVI – the Pope dedicated to this topic one of his first papers, New Pagans and the Church. It is a fight for the truth. The same Pope, in his book Light of the World, observed that a large part of contemporary philosophies affirm that the man is not able of truth. «The consequence is – Tomasi comments – that man is not any more able of ethical values, cannot have objective standards and ends by accepting as the only standard the opinion of majority».

Not casually the first message of Benedict XVI for the World Day of Peace was titled: «In Truth, peace». And not casually the major part of battles on this topic had been brought on – during the last years – by msgr. Tomas from Geneva. His speeches, interventions, papers had been rarely highlighted by medias. Yet, they have a strong diplomatic impact.

In some ways, there will be a little of Silvano Maria Tomasi in the next Concistory. The red hat given to Antonio Maria Vegliò, president of the Pontifical Council for Migrants, is the signal that the Pontifical Council gained a renewed importance, and this is also thanks to the entrance of the Holy See as a full member in the International Organization for Migration. This entrance, Tomasi proposed and strongly supported.

Holy See is accredited as a full member in several international organizations – e.g. IAEA, as a founding member – while it keeps the status of permanent observer to the United Nation. Holy See has no intention to get a “political” weight by becoming a full member of the United Nations – what if the Holy See would vote in a session to finance a military intervention? What would be the international and political backlashes? On the other hand, is very important that the Holy See have a “political” weight when political on migrations are on discussion. During the 100th session of the Council of the International Migration, Tomasi underlined that «the achievement of an adequate global management of migration flows, a positive understanding of them , and the approach to human development may seem long range goals. But the speed of the journey is less important than proceeding in the right direction».

What is the right direction? «Nowadays – Tomasi wrote – it is not easy to indicate a clear date when a way of thinking began. Therefore, the change of the dictionary and the prevalence of a new one began with the sexual revolution of 1968 and imposed with more coherence and insistence after the fall of the Wall of Berlin in 1989». It was then that the two blocks of the Cold War had been replaced by a plurality of actors in the international scenario. «In this new situation – Tomasi explained in a debate on February, 17 2011  – United Nations felt freer. More: they felt invested of the precise mission to promote practical priorities that – according to the advisors involved – would have led to a more rightful and free world».

From 1989 on, the new language to sustain this mission has been built up on a series of «key words»: human globalization, sustainable development, good governance, world ethic, cultural diversity, dialogue among civilization, quality of life, gender, equal opportunities, homophobia, sexual orientation, safe abortion, future generations rights, non-governmental organization, partnerships, civil society, participative democracy, transnational networks, consensus building, inclusive approach, agent-actor of social transformation, best practices, sexual and reproductive rights, right of choice, equal commerce, diverse forms of family.

On the other hand, the words that belong to the Christian-Judaic tradition are excluded, or even tend to disappear: truth, moral, conscience, reason, earth, will, parents, spouse, husband, mother, father, son, daughter, chastity, complementariness, service, authority, hierarchies, law, commandment, dogma, sin, nature, marriage.

This new dictionary is – Tomasi explained – «a mixture of words of authentic human aspirations and values and of words that represent an individualistic ideology brought to the limit. This latter inspires and guides the managers of the world governance. This is how we get to a systematic and lasting transition of words in the documents of United Nations: from government to governance, from authority to autonomy and rights of the individuals, from spouse to partner, from happiness to quality of life, from given to built, from family to family in all of his forms, from dignity sufferance to the right to die, from majority decision to consensus, from dogma to freedom of interpretation».

These changes of the dictionary are part of a long term battle, whose seeds can be seen back in international conference and interventions.  For example, in the 1995 Conference of Beijing. Mary Ann Glendon, who was part of the Vatican delegation at the time, was not lenient towards the UN’s intentions:  «Many who promote abortion as a woman’s right do not by any means have women’s real interests at heart. The movement for abortion rights conceals irresponsible men, trafficking in prostitution, industries that make their profits from women’s bodies».

And a book has been published in Italy that brings to light for the first time in a direct and detailed way this anti-Catholic aversion of the UN and the EU: «Contro il cristianesimo. L’ONU e l’Unione Europea come nuova ideologia [Against Christianity: The UN and the European Union as a New Ideology]», by Eugenia Roccella and Lucetta Scaraffia.  In the introduction to the volume, Roccella and Scaraffia identify the roots of the new ideology as the «separation between sexuality and procreation». «More – they write – than a different model of sexual behavior, but conceptually analogous to those that have preceded it in history, this is a question of a real and true utopia, because it is based upon the idea that human beings can find happiness in the realization of their sexual desires, without the moral, biological, social, and relational limitations linked to procreation. This utopia has its roots in the sexual revolution in the West during the 1960′s, and it has not yet been disputed, even though it seems not to have kept its promises. It is a utopia that echoes another, one that brings painful memories: that the selection of new human beings can create a better, more healthy, more beautiful humanity».

It is not just a matter of words. It is a matter of ideology. The conceptual scenario has its own dynamics, and this leads to concrete transformations in several branches of social and political life. Religious freedom and the way it has been handled down is an example. An approach to religious freedom linked to intolerance is first brought on in the Declaration on the principles of Tolerance of UNESCO in 1995 and is then promoted in the Resolution 2004/36 adopted from the 60th session of the Human Rights Commission in the United Nations in 2004. A new chapter of the quest is then open with the  resolution 61/164 (Combating the defamations of religions), adopted from the General Assembly of the United Nations December, 19th 2006. In that resolution, religion is used to limit other basic freedoms (the right to the freedom of expression) and to oppress religious minorities when some impose with force and terrorism their religious ideologies and others deny a place in the public sphere to faith and belief.

As always, one should look back in time. It was in 1981 – when the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted the Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief – that the concept of tolerance has been placed by side to religion or belief. «But tolerance – Tomasi explains – is a tool, not a right. In fact, while with religious freedom we mean the warranty of Government that individuals have freedom of belief and the warranty of freedom of cult for individuals and groups – including the freedom not to believe in any god, religious tolerance is the condition to accept or permit beliefs or religious practice that are different from his own one».

Holy See is one of the few sovereign entities that is aware of the risks of this change of dictionary, and that understood that this is a crucial battle. The efforts of the Holy See in this battle are probably on the basis of the initiatives to undermine the Holy See diplomacy, from the outside and from the inside.

In this crucial battle, archbishop Tomasi is one of the paladins of the Church.  He works behind the curtain, but he is one of the few intelligences able to understand what are the things on the play. United Nations have the ambition of a New World Order, and to follow this goal they create a new anthropology. «The implication – Tomasi explained – is that adaequatio rei et intellectus (the accordance of the intelligence with reality) – gained from the reason and theology – is to be replaced from a reality that is socially and subjectively built, so that truth and reality has not a stable and objective contents and every interpretation of this content is equal. This dictatorship of relativism does not use visible and brutal methods as political dictatorships. It works from inside the institution and – through consensus – promote a neutrality that let impose their own norms».

Traditionally, the speech the Pope holds in front of the Diplomatic Corp Accredited of the Holy See marks the beginning of the new year. The Pope goes through all the remarkable international facts of the past year, usually paraphrasing the contents of the message for the World Day of Peace. But in the speech held the last January, 9th, the contents of the message for the World Day of Peace 2012 – Educating young people in justice and peace – took just a few lines of the speech. And the speech itself is more focused on the message that would have been, more than on the one that had been delivered. In fact, the original sketch of the message had been profusely amended by the Vatican Secretariat of State. To have an idea of what the first sketch of the message was, it would be sufficient to read the speech that msgr. Mario Toso – secretary of Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace – held at the opening of the School of Peace in Este.

What does the Pope really think? The 9th of January speech marks the line. The Pope knows that the difference of Christianity is in truth. He knows that the Church must obviously dialogue with the «signs of our time», but that at the same time the Church cannot lose its identity. This lack of identity, Joseph Ratzinger – as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith – wanted to underline in the declaration Dominus Jesus. This lack of identity, Joseph Ratzinger – as young theologian – underlined in a paper, «New pagans and Church», that came directly from his first experience as vice parish priest – when he used to confess one hour a day, and four hours every Sunday. And Christian identity, based on truth, had become the center of the program of his Pontificate.

It is because of Truth – Benedict XVI underlined in the message for World Day of Peace 2011 – Christians are persecuted. And this is why – the Pope said to the ambassadors in the 9th of January speech – «in many countries Christians are deprived of fundamental rights and sidelined from public life; in other countries they endure violent attacks against their churches and their homes. At times they are forced to leave the countries they have helped to build because of persistent tensions and policies which frequently relegate them to being second-class spectators of national life. In other parts of the world, we see policies aimed at marginalizing the role of religion in the life of society, as if it were a cause of intolerance rather than a valued contribution to education in respect for human dignity, justice and peace».

Notwithstanding the attempts to undermine the Holy See diplomacy, diplomatic corps accredited to the Holy See has increased during the last year, since Malaysia established diplomatic ties with the Holy See and the Association of South-East Asian Nations (A.S.E.A.N.) accepted the appointment of an apostolic nuncio accredited to that organization. Another sign of the cooperation existing between the Catholic Church and States is seen in the Accords reached in 2011 with Azerbaijan, Montenegro and Mozambique. But probably the main piece of news is in the intention of Benedict XVI to concentrate the procedures of diplomacy on international law.

The speech of the Pope follows the first sketch of the message of the World Day of Peace: from the financial crisis to the Arab Spring and the «vast movement calling for reforms and a more active share in political and social life» brought on by young people, and finally to the request for the «respect of the creation», universal issue that needs «a great sense of solidarity and responsibility towards present and future generations» to be pursued.

Yet, in view of the renewed outbreak of violence in Nigeria, in view of the hostilities and acts of violence that continue in Syria, in view of tensions between Palestinians and Israelis that affect the stability of the entire Middle East (Benedict XVI praises to the Kingdom of Jordan mediation), an excellent person merges as a symbol: Shahbaz Bhatti, the Pakistan minister for Religious Minorities, whose «untiring battle for the rights of minorities ended in his tragic death. Sadly, we are not speaking of an isolated case. In many countries Christians are deprived of fundamental rights and sidelined from public life».

To this sideline of religion, Pope opposes «the legislative amendment whereby the public juridical personality of religious minorities was recognized in Georgia», and then also «the sentence of the European Court of Human Rights upholding the presence of the crucifix in Italian schoolrooms».

Benedict XVI also asks «to implement educational policies which ensure that schooling is available to everyone and which, in addition to promoting the cognitive development of the individual, show concern for a balanced personal growth, including openness to the Transcendent».

Before the education, there is the human being. The Pope provides law responses: he notes «with satisfaction the recent sentence of the Court of Justice of the European Union forbidding patenting processes relative to human embryonic stem cells, as well as the resolution of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe condemning prenatal selection on the basis of sex». More: «I am convinced –  Benedict XVI says – that legislative measures which not only permit but at times even promote abortion for reasons of convenience or for questionable medical motives compromise the education of young people and, as a result, the future of humanity».

And before the human being, there is the openness to the Trascendent. «Religion – the Pope says, as he already did in Assisi – cannot be employed as a pretext for setting aside the rules of justice and of law for the sake of the intended ‘good’. In this context I am proud to recall, as I did in my native country, that the Christian vision of man was the true inspiration for the framers of Germany’s Basic Law, as indeed it was for the founders of a united Europe».

It is a recall to the roots of Western civilization, and to the rules and laws produced following these common roots. Benedict XVI does not want to play the same game medias and institutions against the Church play. He remarks the difference of Christianity. And – to do it – he does not commit in communication campaigns, he does not choose to follow the signs of our times and to outline a Church adherent to the world. He just points out what the difference is, and he recalls to laws that had been inspired by this peculiar difference. The game is not any more based on  communication and diplomacy. The game the Pope is now playing is based on truth and law. This is a more solid path to thread. It is a path more adherent to Truth.