Saturday, 31 January 2009

A letter in the Times

There is a letter in the print edition of today's Times newspaper headed "Papal Relations", and referring to the controversy surrounding the lifting of the excommunications of the bishops of the Society of St Pius X. The author of the letter is the Executive Director of the Centre for the Study of Jewish-Christian Relations, an independent insitute in Cambridge. Dr Kessler ends his letter:

... perhaps we can no longer expect genuine commitment to dialogue from the highest levels of the Roman Catholic Church. The days of John Paul II seem a long time ago.

During his overseas visits, Pope Benedict includes a meeting with the leaders of other Christian denominations and with the leaders of other religions. The visit to Cologne in 2005, for the World Youth Day, exemplifies this. If this does not represent a commitment to dialogue "at the highest level" I am not sure what does. At the time of the visit to Cologne, I wrote the following commentary on the text of Pope Benedict's address during the meeting with leaders of other Christian denominations:

5. Dialogue with other Christian denominations

“The real question is the presence of the Word in the world.”[1]

5.1 Three contexts for dialogue

Pope Benedict’s address to representatives of other Christian denominations is arguably the most difficult of his addresses during the visit to Cologne. It is possible to identify in the address three contexts into which the more specific question of dialogue is placed.

The first of these contexts is the special situation of Germany, both as the country where the Reformation began and also as one of the countries where the ecumenical movement of the twentieth century began. Immigration from Eastern countries has introduced dialogue with Orthodox Churches and the ancient Churches of the east to the German ecumenical scene. Germany thus has a privileged position with regard to ecumenical dialogue.[2]

The second of these contexts can be summarised by the word “realism”. This realism wishes first of all to recognise the extent to which unity already exists, both as fraternity between Christians and in the supernatural reality of a common baptism:
“I feel the fact that we consider one another brothers and sisters, that we love one another, that together we are witnesses of Jesus Christ, should not be taken so much for granted. I believe that this brotherhood is in itself a very important fruit of dialogue that we must rejoice in, continue to foster and to practice.

“Among Christians, fraternity is not just a vague sentiment, nor is it a sign of indifference to truth. As you just said, Bishop, it is grounded in the supernatural reality of the one Baptism which makes us all members of the one Body of Christ (cf. I Cor 12: 13; Gal 3: 28; Col 2: 12).

“Together we confess that Jesus Christ is God and Lord; together we acknowledge him as the one mediator between God and man (cf. I Tm 2: 5), and we emphasize that together we are members of his Body (cf. Unitatis Redintegratio, n. 22; Ut Unum Sint, n. 42). “[3]

This realism also wishes to honestly recognise situations where differences have arisen and is clear in its presentation of a Catholic position:

“Another urgent priority in ecumenical dialogue arises from the great ethical questions of our time; in this area, contemporary man, who is searching, rightly expects a common response on the part of Christians, which, thanks be to God, in many cases has been forthcoming.

“There are so many common declarations by the German Bishops' Conference and the Evangelical Churches in Germany that we can be grateful for, but unfortunately, this does not always happen. Because of contradictory positions in this area our witness to the Gospel and the ethical guidance which we owe to the faithful and to society lose their impact and often appear too vague, with the result that we fail in our duty to provide the witness that is needed in our time.”[4]

“We all know there are numerous models of unity and you know that the Catholic Church also has as her goal the full visible unity of the disciples of Christ, as defined by the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council in its various Documents (cf. Lumen Gentium, nn. 8, 13; Unitatis Redintegratio, nn. 2, 4, etc.). This unity, we are convinced, indeed subsists in the Catholic Church, without the possibility of ever being lost (cf. Unitatis Redintegratio, n. 4); the Church in fact has not totally disappeared from the world.

“On the other hand, this unity does not mean what could be called ecumenism of the return: that is, to deny and to reject one's own faith history. Absolutely not!”[5]

The third context for ecumenical dialogue is that of “spiritual ecumenism”. Pope Benedict cited the “father of spiritual ecumenism”, Paul Couturier, in urging that more and more people unite themselves to the prayer of Jesus “that all may be one”, and affirmed his trust in the effectiveness of such prayer[6]. Speaking of Brother Roger Schutz of Taize, who had been tragically killed earlier in the same week, he said:
“I think that we must listen to him, from within we must listen to his spiritually-lived ecumenism and allow ourselves to be led by his witness towards an interiorized and spiritualized ecumenism. “[7]

5.2 An example of dialogue

As far as dialogue itself goes, Pope Benedict offered what he called a “small comment”, seeking to be excused if he had expressed a personal opinion, but that it seemed right for him to do so. He chose to say something about the questions of ecclesiology and ministry, which are suggested as the next topics for dialogue with the Evangelical churches following clarification on the doctrine of justification.

Pope Benedict started with the following sentence, a sentence rich in meaning for both Catholics and Evangelical Christians:
“The real question is the presence of the Word in the world.”[8]

Whatever the specific topic of dialogue, the real question that needs to be kept in sight is the presence of Jesus Christ in the world today. When Pope Benedict continues to develop thoughts on Scripture, Episcopal ministry and teaching authority this is what he focuses back to, recognising that this focus represents common ground:
“In the second century the early Church primarily took a threefold decision: first, to establish the canon, thereby stressing the sovereignty of the Word and explaining that not only is the Old Testament ‘hai graphai’, but together with the New Testament constitutes a single Scripture which is thus for us the master text.

“However, at the same time the Church has formulated an Apostolic Succession, the episcopal ministry, in the awareness that the Word and the witness[9] go together; that is, the Word is alive and present only thanks to the witness, so to speak, and receives from the witness its interpretation. But the witness is only such if he or she witnesses to the Word.

“Third and last, the Church has added the "regula fidei" as a key for interpretation. I believe that this reciprocal compenetration constitutes an object of dissent between us, even though we are certainly united on fundamental things. “[10]

Thus far Pope Benedict has presented what is clearly recognisable as Catholic teaching on the interrelation between Scripture, tradition and teaching authority[11], and, with the note of realism described above, has recognised that this is not something on which agreement exists. It has been offered, however, in a dialogue with notions of “Word”, “witness” and “rule of faith” that are quite familiar to Evangelical theology, and invites an exploration by his audience of the proximity between these notions and those of Catholic theology.

“… when we speak of ecclesiology and of ministry we must preferably speak in this combination of Word, witness and rule of faith
….”[12]

Pope Benedict’s words can be seen as a practical exercise of dialogue within the three contexts that we have noted. However, because the areas touched on are so fundamental to all theological reflection and ecumenical dialogue, they can also be seen as suggesting a basis for all dialogue between Christian communities.


[1] Pope Benedict XVI Address to representatives of various Christian confessions, Cologne, 19th August 2005.
[2] cf Pope Benedict XVI Address to representatives of various Christian confessions, Cologne, 19th August 2005.
[3] Pope Benedict XVI Address to representatives of various Christian confessions, Cologne, 19th August 2005.
[4] Pope Benedict XVI Address to representatives of various Christian confessions, Cologne, 19th August 2005.
[5] Pope Benedict XVI Address to representatives of various Christian confessions, Cologne, 19th August 2005.
[6] cf Pope Benedict XVI Address to representatives of various Christian confessions, Cologne, 19th August 2005.
[7] Pope Benedict XVI Address to representatives of various Christian confessions, Cologne, 19th August 2005.
[8] Pope Benedict XVI Address to representatives of various Christian confessions, Cologne, 19th August 2005.
[9] ie the witness of those in Episcopal ministry, so that Episcopal ministry is seen as witness
[10] Pope Benedict XVI Address to representatives of various Christian confessions, Cologne, 19th August 2005.
[11] cf Vatican Council II Dei Verbum nn.7-10 and Catechism of the Catholic Church nn.75ff.
[12] Pope Benedict XVI Address to representatives of various Christian confessions, Cologne, 19th August 2005.


What interested me when I first wrote this commentary was the sense that Pope Benedict had not only talked about dialogue but had also offered a contribution to dialogue. He had walked the walk as well as talking the talk. I think the nature of this address by Pope Benedict also clearly rules out the possibility of interpreting his approach to ecumenism as being one of "You-come-in-ism"; his contribution to dialogue shows how he puts into practice complete faithfulness to Catholic teaching and a real engagement with the thought of another Christian denomination.

In parentheses, Dr Kessler also makes reference in his letter to "damaged" Catholic-Muslim relations, arising from Pope Benedict's Regensburg address. But it is really quite interesting to see that, after the media frenzy had died down, that address has led to a level of Catholic-Muslim dialogue that would have been almost unimaginable before Regensburg. A responding public letter by Muslim scholars led to the establishing of a Catholic-Muslim Forum which produced a statement following a first meeting in November 2008 and which looks forward to a second meeting in two years time. This is the introduction to that statement:

The Catholic-Muslim Forum was formed by the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue and a delegation of the 138 Muslim signatories of the open letter called A Common Word, in the light of the same document and the response of His Holiness Benedict XVI through his Secretary of State, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone. Its first Seminar was held in Rome from 4-6 November 2008. Twenty-four participants and five advisors from each religion took part in the meeting. The theme of the Seminar was "Love of God, Love of Neighbour." The discussion, conducted in a warm and convivial spirit, focused on two great themes: "Theological and Spiritual Foundations" and "Human Dignity and Mutual Respect." Points of similarity and of diversity emerged, reflecting the distinctive specific genius of the two religions.

An immediate thought occurs to me, on reading the full text of this statement of the Catholic-Muslim Forum, as to how far its contents reflect fully different strands within Islamic life (eg with regard to women) - but the commitment of the Vatican to the dialogue is not to be doubted.

So, pace Dr Kessler, I believe that Pope Benedict is fully committed to both ecumenical and inter-religious dialogue.

3 comments:

la mamma said...

An exceptionally well-argued and substantiated post, Joe. Would that everyone took the trouble to research before submitting their words to 'print'!

Anonymous said...

Dr Kessler's letter has the appearance of having been written by someone with an alarmingly superficial grasp of the varied circumstances of the several instances occasioning criticism of the pope. Just because some Islamists, some Zionists, some homosexualists and some Protestants have found material with which to disagree proves little other than the fact that they disagree. Indeed it would be interesting to see the extent, if at all, to which such papal critics might be induced to agree with one another.

Joe said...

Letters answering to Dr Kessler's letter appeared in the Times on 2nd February:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/letters/article5634043.ece