I am pretty certain that Pope Benedict has chosen to resign/retire/abdicate because he has done the work he feels he is capable of doing and now feels someone else can do what needs to be done with more better by someone else.
I am much taken by the story that an artist, a little annoyed that he seemed a little less than keen about sitting for a portrait, said, "A picture is worth a thousand words". Pope Benedict replied, "Ah yes, but a concept is worth a thousand pictures".
Cardinal Murphy O'Connor gave an off the cuff interview last week in which he said, “This [the next Pontificate] is going to be another conservative Pope – perhaps the last before a great explosion in the Church.” A lot of the interview was off the cuff and therefore not thought through, even the term "conservative" presents the Cardinal as someone who hadn't managed to get with the Benedictine "programme", indeed CMOC saw himself as being one of the "kingmakers" at the last Conclave but today most of those he gathered around him in those pre-Conclave soirees, presumably in support of the "Martini faction" are either dead like Martini himself or past voting age like Cormac himself or in disgrace like Cardinals Mahony and Daneels. If anything Pope Benedict's going at a time of his choosing means he has decided on the timing of the Conclave.
It is worth considering the "great explosion" of which Cormac spoke. For people of his stance the presumption is that the pressures in and on the Church are going to become uncontainable. Pope Benedict would simply suggest we turn to "the roots", to Christ, (is this why for his going he called for the "Year of Faith"?) this can be compared to the destructive influence of the "non-Conservatives" who would suggest we need clever schemes to deal with problems, or even change the faith which has been passed on to us.
Movements like We are the Church and the Austrian Priest Initiative the Irish Association of Catholic Priests are not going to gather strength, they are simply going to grow even older and die out. Younger people are simply not interested in that kind of churchiness, nor the hippy obsession with "changing the system".
The Conclave of 2005 was full of Cardinals like Cormac who were excited by vision of VII, many like Cormac were young priests or seminarians when in it was in progress, the Cardinals who will now occupy the electors seats are those who had to deal with the excesses and problems it raised, the false optimism and false pessimism, as the Pope said in his address to the Seminarians of Rome -remember the Pope's addresses are as much to the Curia as to those he actually addresses,
As fond as I am of the Bishop who ordained me, I just wish those of Cormacs generation had been more concened by "turning to the Lord" and "seeking the face of Christ", two of the Pope's favourite phrases, rather than cunning schemes that in retrospect seemed like deck chair moving.
I think he has left us we several "concepts", briefly:
- the idea that there is a correct and incorrect interpretation of Vatican II,
- he has gone along way to reconciling the Church's present to its past, Summorum Pontificum is an important part of this
- he has gone along to dismantling the political notions of left and right, liberal and conservative (the media hasn't caught on to this yet) and restoring the notion of Catholic orthodoxy.
- he has re-presented the idea that Pope is the Bishop of Rome - certainly first amongst equals - (I'll explore this at a later stage but I think this important).
- that "Unity" in terms of ecumenism is about looking to those who share (substantially) the catholic faith - hence Ordinariates and looking towards the Orthodox
I am sure this list could be extended, this is my myopic view.
Cardinal Murphy O'Connor gave an off the cuff interview last week in which he said, “This [the next Pontificate] is going to be another conservative Pope – perhaps the last before a great explosion in the Church.” A lot of the interview was off the cuff and therefore not thought through, even the term "conservative" presents the Cardinal as someone who hadn't managed to get with the Benedictine "programme", indeed CMOC saw himself as being one of the "kingmakers" at the last Conclave but today most of those he gathered around him in those pre-Conclave soirees, presumably in support of the "Martini faction" are either dead like Martini himself or past voting age like Cormac himself or in disgrace like Cardinals Mahony and Daneels. If anything Pope Benedict's going at a time of his choosing means he has decided on the timing of the Conclave.
It is worth considering the "great explosion" of which Cormac spoke. For people of his stance the presumption is that the pressures in and on the Church are going to become uncontainable. Pope Benedict would simply suggest we turn to "the roots", to Christ, (is this why for his going he called for the "Year of Faith"?) this can be compared to the destructive influence of the "non-Conservatives" who would suggest we need clever schemes to deal with problems, or even change the faith which has been passed on to us.
Movements like We are the Church and the Austrian Priest Initiative the Irish Association of Catholic Priests are not going to gather strength, they are simply going to grow even older and die out. Younger people are simply not interested in that kind of churchiness, nor the hippy obsession with "changing the system".
The Conclave of 2005 was full of Cardinals like Cormac who were excited by vision of VII, many like Cormac were young priests or seminarians when in it was in progress, the Cardinals who will now occupy the electors seats are those who had to deal with the excesses and problems it raised, the false optimism and false pessimism, as the Pope said in his address to the Seminarians of Rome -remember the Pope's addresses are as much to the Curia as to those he actually addresses,
Of course, there is a false optimism and a false pessimism. A false pessimism tells us that the epoch of Christianity is over. No: it is beginning again! The false optimism was the post-Council optimism, when convents closed, seminaries closed and they said “but... nothing, everything is fine!”.... No! Everything is not fine. There are also serious, dangerous omissions and we have to recognize with healthy realism that in this way things are not all right, it is not all right when errors are made.Opinionated Catholic has just published some extracts from some 1969 radio talks by the then Professor Ratzinger on the the "great explosion", or less dramatically the time of a new beginning for the Church, when we are stripped of everything but Christ.
As fond as I am of the Bishop who ordained me, I just wish those of Cormacs generation had been more concened by "turning to the Lord" and "seeking the face of Christ", two of the Pope's favourite phrases, rather than cunning schemes that in retrospect seemed like deck chair moving.
0 comments:
Post a Comment