Benedict XVI and the battle for truth:
Massimo Introvigne on the Pope's Magisterium
by Antonio Gaspari
Translated from the Italian service of
ROME, Jan. 31 (ZENIT.org).- Benedict XVI is not only one of the greatest living intellectuals but also one of the world's most widely-read authors.
And yet, even among Christians, his texts are rarely read in their entirety and hardly ever studied appropriately. Often, his Magisterium is relativized
[and misrepresented or distorted], contested, and mostly not known,
In order to make his points about Benedict XVI's Magisterium, sociologist and religious historian Massimo Introvigne has just published the book
Tu sei Pietro. Benedetto XVI contro la dittatura del relativismo(TU ES PETRUS: Benedict XVI against the dictatorship of relativism)(Sugarco, Milano 2011).
In 320 pp., Introvigne comments on the Pope's Magisterium, from the encyclical
Spe salvi in 2007 to the Apostolic Letter
Ubicumque et semper of 2010 which institutes the Pontifical Council for Promoting New Evangelization.
He illustrates through the Pope's own texts how the Pontiff is carrying on an offensive against the dictatorship of relativism in order to broaden the horizons of reason, re-anchor faith to the hearts of the faithful, and make room for the proclamation of truth.
"From Africa to France to Great Britain, from his own diocese of Rome to the White House, and his encounters with young people in the World Youth days," Introvigne writes, "Benedict XVI emerges as the primary custodian not only of the faith but also of reason threatened by relativism. Because of this, many attack him. Because of this, it is the duty of the Catholic faithful to rally around him closely, and repeating to him the words of Jesus, 'You are Peter, the rock on which I will build my Church'."
Inrovigne has written 60 books and hundreds of articles published in international academic journals on the new religions, contemporary religious pluralism and the papal Magisterium.
He is the founder and director of CESNUR (Centro degli Studi sulle Nuove Religioni) and a member of the Italian Interior Ministry's Commission for Islam in Italy. Recently, he was named a representative to the committee of the European Organization for Security and Cooperation to fight intolerance and anti-Christian discrimination.
Why did you decide to write this book?
I am a deputy national officer of the Alleanza Cattolica, an association whose specific calling is to study and disseminate the social teaching of the Church.
The Magisterium has been much discussed, distinguishing between infallible and non-infallible, dogmatic and pastoral, ordinary and extraordinary - and every blogger fancies himself a theologian, but Benedict XVI said the truth in his recent book-length interview:
Many speak about the Magisterium without having read it.
For instance, the Pope's views on Vatican II are constantly being questioned - when he has written and spoken about it so many times. If we rule out bad faith among those who pose such questions, one can only conclude they have not read the pertinent texts.
You rightly point out the problem of how the Magisterium is 'received' by the clergy and by the faithful. Setting aside the mass media and many so-called intellectuals who criticize the Pope, it is a fact that the majority of Catholics have never read what the Pope says or writes. Not even the texts of his weekly catecheses and Angelus messages. In general, many laymen and even most priests make do with what the mass media report about what the Pope has said. How do you address this problem in your book?
That the problem concerns the 'normal' functioning of the Church itself, and that perhaps the solution lies with the lay faithful since too many priests are occupied with doing other things.
Another problem is that not all priests cite the Pope's words in their homilies or catecheses. Is this simple ignorance about what the Pope says and writes, or a failure to understand it, or simply that they have never really paid attention to the 'ordinary' Magisterium?
I see three related problems. First, there is a 'progressivist' minority of priests who consciously and deliberately reject Benedict XVI whom they consider 'too conservative'.
There is another minority that the Pope calls 'anti-conciliar', who in their obsession to reject Vatican II as not being infallible, also consider the Pope's daily non-infallible Magisterium as irrelevant, forgetting that the faithful must follow the entire Church Magisterium, not only its infallible dogmas.
And there is a whole sea of people, perhaps the overwhelming majority, who simply are not aware of the Magisterium because their daily routine does not give them the occasion or the time to do so.
And yet, this Pope is one of the most widely-read authors in the world. His books, for all their specifically Catholic content, are translated and sold around the world. He is considered highly credible and held in great esteem by religious and laymen of other faiths, and among atheist or pagan thinkers. How do you explain this phenomenon?
As I like to point out, the passionate followers of Benedict XVI whom I meet are much more often laymen than clergy. And it is true that among these passionate readers of his are many non-Catholics and non-believers. He is one of the great thinkers of our day, and so, even non-believers find it their duty - and often a pleasure, I believe - to encounter his mind in these books.
You point out that one problem is also the partial and often 'time-limited' or topical reading of pontifical teaching. But you say that on the contrary, each text must be read in the light of the present Pope's previous interventions and of what other Popes have said about the same subject. That each new teaching is a standard or criterion for reading the next text or intervention. Can you illustrate this with an example?
I do not have a personal point of view on this topic, but I can point out what this Pope himself has illustrated so many times. Let us take the example of
Caritas in veritate. Benedict cites Paul VI's
Populorum progressio and explains that in order not to reduce it to a mere 'collection of sociological data' which perhaps are no longer of interest to anyone today, that encyclical must be read in the light of all the social Magisterium that preceded it and which explains and clarifies it. This is what the Church calls 'living Tradition' and this spirit must be applied to every document of the Magisterium.
Some have accused Benedict XVI as having ruined the ecumenical dialog because he is too rigorous in announcing the Catholic faith. when actually, with the Anglicans, the Lutherans and the Orthodox, relations today have never been better. How do you explain this?
In the recent Week of Prayer for Christian Unity, the Pope reaffirmed two truths about ecumenism. The first is that, especially among the Protestants, it is undergoing a season of crisis which has nothing to do with theological or spiritual reasons, but because some large Protestant communities have yielded to the spirit of the times on matters like abortion and same-sex marriage. Which other Christians cannot ignore for the sake of 'ecumenical coexistence', but it must be constantly stressed to the secularized why these practices are wrong, arguing from reason and not just from faith.
The second fact is that despite some serious difficulties, the Second Vatican Council's decision for ecumenism is irreversible and obligatory, and part of the nucleus of Benedict XVI's Pontificate. The Pope points out that the Church believes in the effort, even if it often seems difficult and even impossible, because the Lord himself wants it so.
Non-Catholic Christians understand this ecumenical position of the Pope - a position that is most heroic and certainly cause for suffering - more than many Catholics who may say 'Long live the Pope!' but ignore or fail to appreciate this essential dimension of his Pontificate.