| | | OFFLINE | | Post: 26.861
Post: 9.345 | Registrato il: 28/08/2005
Registrato il: 20/01/2009 | Administratore | Utente Master | |
|
Thpugh it is dated June 22, 2013, the Vatican has belatedly posted its bulletin on the Saturday concert at the Vatican that Pope Francis declined to attend. I see no word of apology either in Mons. Fisichella's words to the assembly to explain the Pope's absence nor in the brief letter of greeting that he read from the Pope.
Concert on the occasion
of the Year of Faith
June 22, 2013
At 5:30 this afternoon, at the Vatican's Aula Paolo VI, a Grand Concert of Classical Music took place, under the auspices of the Pontifical Council for Promoting the New Evangelization, on the occasion of the Year of Faith.
Before the concert began, Archbishop Rino Fisichella, president of the Council, conveyed to those present a greeting from the Holy Father, who was not present:
"The Holy Father has charged me to bring to you his most cordial greeting, and his regret not to be able to share this evening with us because of an urgent task that cannot be delayed which he must confront at this time. I can say, however, that the events planned for him tomorrow, are all confirmed. I have the honor to read a few words that the Holy Father has sent":
Dear Cardinals, Venerated Brothers in the Episcopate and Priesthood, Ladies and Gentlemen:
I wish to say Thank You to all those who organized and made this concert for the Year of Faith possible. I especially thank the soloists, the Choir of the Accademia Nazionale di Santa Cecilia, the Orchestra Sinfonia Nazionale [of RAI - not identified in the message], conductor Maestro Juraj Valčuha for the remarkable execution of this monumental symphony, which not only allows us to experience a moment of pause and spiritual upliftment, but inspires in all of us sentiments and emotions that urge us to reflection. Thank you so much.
The National Symphony Orchestra of RAI, under Maestro Juraj Valčuha, performed Beethoven's Symphony No. 9 for soloists, chorus and orchestra, accompanied ]by the Choir of the Accademia Nazionale di Santa Cecilia.
The written message from the Holy Father sounds like the words he would have said had he attended the concert, because he thanks the performers for their 'remarkable execution' of the symphony. But forget that little slip. The lack of a direct expression of apology for not being present is disturbing, as the entire episode is, for that matter. There is a Spanish saying we grew up with, as an incessant reproach from the elders when we were being impolite - "Lo cortez no quita lo valiente", literally "Courtesy takes nothing from courage", or more to the point, "You lose nothing by being polite". I am not saying the Holy Father would ever be impolite - that is unthinkable, even - but the manner he chose to stay way from this concert was certainly far from ideal.
And now, the Pope's adulators (idolators, really), like Repubblica's Paolo Rodari, are saying absurdities like this: "The Pope's refusal to attend the concert seems like the nth signal from the Pope of keeping his distance from a world that he does not feel to be his: the world of the Roman Curia, the Apostolic Palace, the rooms associated with Vatican power which lives and feeds on concerts and evening festivities. 'I work - none of that worldliness for me' is the sense that he means to convey to his co-workers". That's just too over the top to even comment on! But I will point out to Rodari anyway: Whoever accepts to be Pope accepts the 'world' that comes with being Pope - tradition, customs, practices, institutions. It is the Pope who makes of that 'world' what he wants it to be - even if all factors are not within his control (human nature is not changed by a mass phenomenon but by individual convcrsion).
But a Pope can surely follow the papal traditions, customs and practices his predecessors did unquestioningly because in themselves, they are innocuous - for instance, is anyone offended or deprived of anything by a Pope wearing his ceremonial mozzetta and stole, or living in the Apostolic Residence which is meant for the Pope? - even if, in private, they may express their discomfort or dislike of some aspects of these 'papal' usages handed down to them, as many modern Popes have done.
We've been through this over and over since March 13, 2013. Is it really humble to assert your own personal will and preference - be it ever so simple and seemingly humble - over time-honored papal usages that are intrinsically innocuous? Isn't such self-assertion a form of arrogance? And because such show gestures are generally received with great praise from the public, do they not constitute demagoguery, in its narrow sense of playing to the crowd?
Comparison is inevitable here, and not invidious at all in this case. For all his punctilious but hardly indiscriminate respect of the papal tradition handed down to him, Benedict XVI was never accused, even by his detractors, of enjoying or abusing the powers and privileges of the Papacy. They mocked his personal style for trivialities like wearing Prada shoes, which was not even a fact, or trendy brand sunglasses, or choosing to wear the camauro and saturno which they did not mock when John XXIII and other previous Popes wore them (even John Paul II wore the saturno when necessary). Or even for wearing the papal liturgical vestments (and using the papal chairs) from the historical collection that St. Peter's Sacristy has.
But no one ever accused him of mis-spending or over-spending to buy himself anything material or to live in luxury. Or of unseemly pomp in his liturgies, for that matter. His considerable annual income from his book royalties all go to foundations that use the money for educational, research and charitable purposes. The seven rooms occupied by him and his household in the Apostolic Palace are smaller than rooms in most middle-class apartments [and it was hyperbolic and inconsiderate of the new Pope to say "There is room here for 300 people" when he was first shown the papal apartment, even if he was quoted by the Vatican Press Office to underscore his simplicity and humility] and were furnished spartanly compared to the public rooms of the Apostolic residence.
I have absolutely no doubt that Pope Francis is a simple man and a humble man and a holy man. But even saints have blind spots, and in his case, since I have gone this far, I think it includes failing to see the wider meaning of humility beyond those mere gestures that are generally considered 'humble'. Sometimes a firm and deep-seated conviction that one is right about certain things can create tunnel vision, and I can only think this is the case with the Holy Father about his personal preferences.
I was going to add Sandro Magister's two reactions to the 'disconcertment at a missed concert' - one as a postscript to his 'assessment' of Poep Francis's first 100 days as Pope, and the other on his blog, but as I was scrolling down to get to this post, I did not realize I was scrolling down the wrong page until I got to my re-post of Benedict XVI's lectio divina on Baptism. When lo and behold, some words leaped out at me...Of course, Benedict said them in a totally different context, but mutatis mutandis, I found a rather serendipitous analogy to the thoughts I had expressed above about humility:
"...the 'pomp of the devil' also refers to a kind of culture, a 'way of life' [The Pope uses the English term], in which truth does not matter, only appearances. Truth is not sought, but effect, sensation; and under the pretext of truth...the object is to destroy others and to build up themselves as the winners..."
Anyway, to get to Magister's double-barreled reaction to the disconcerting concert snub. First from his P.S. to his www.chiesa article...
POST=SCRIPTUM: Precisely on the day he marked his 100th day as Pope on June 22, Francis did something which left even some of his most dedicated adulators speechless.
Because of an unspecified "urgent task which cannot be postponed" - which was announced at the very last minute and without warning even to L'Osservatore Romano which went to press for the next day's issue around that time - his seat remained empty in the center of Aula Paolo VI, where a concert was to be offered in his honor on the occasion of the Year of Faith, with Beethoven's Ninth Symphony.
"I am not a Renaissance prince who listens to music instead of working", was the remark attributed to him by some 'papists' in the Curia, without thinking that this could only be damaging for the Pope. [Really? How so, when 95% of reports and comments I have seen so far in the Italian med9a - for some reason, only Father Z picked up the story among the Anglophone Pope watchers - are acclaiming his action as yet another shining example of his virtue! The other point is that Stampa/Vatican Insider's Giacomo Galeazzi who was the very first to report the 'Renaissance prince' remark, because he was the very first to write about the Pope's effective 'snub' of the concert, said the quotation came from one of the Pope's 'close associates' not from 'Papists in the Curia'.
For Church historian Albetto Melloni, the Pope's gesture has the greatness of 'a solemn and severe death knell" [For what? For concerts in Aula Paolo VI? For music as a form of worldliness that good Chrtistians must eschew?] that "confirms Francis's innovative style". [But innovations are supposed to be for the better! And when a Pope introduces innovations on the basis of his personal preferences - and personal interpretation of Christian teaching - the message should at least be unequivocal and not bound to create confusion!]
But what it really does is to make the start of this Pontificate even more indecipherable.
The evangelical impulse of Pope Francis, his desire to reach the 'existential peripheries' of mankind, would in f have a vehicle of extraordinary efficacy in the great language of music.
In Beethoven's Ninth, this language reaches sublime peaks which makes it comprehensible beyond every frontier of faith and becomes a 'Courtyard of the Gentiles' with unmeasurable reach.
At each concert that he attended as Pope, Benedict XVI always shared reflections on the music performed, reflections that touched both the heart and the mind.
One year ago (June 1, 2012), after having heard the Ninth at La Scala in Milan, Papa Ratzinger concluded his post-concert remarks, saying:
[COL
After this concert. many of you will go to Eucharistic Adoration of the God who immersed himself in our sufferings and continues to do so. To the God who suffers with us and for us, and thus made men and women capable of sharing the suffering of others and to transform this into love. It is to this that we feel called upon to do by this symphony.
Further on this matter: Let us not even get into the question of courtesy that underlies this episode, but simply stick with the singularly inept excuse given. What task could have been so urgent that it could not be delayed for the 90 minutes that the Pope would have needed to grace the concert with his presence? I can't think of one, but then I have a very poor imagination. The adulators of course said it must have had to do with reform of the Curia but he has already said he is leaving that to his cardinal advisors who will work out a plan that he will then approve! And they do not meet until October.
Might it not have been more honest - and it would certainly have earned far greater kudos for him = to have issued a statement along the lines of "I am most thankful for the offering of this concert, and most happy that you will all have a musical experience that will be an occasion for spiritual upliftment as this great work has always been. It is a pleasure, however, that I deny myself because I personally have so many other sources and occasions for spiritual upliftment, simply in carrying out my daily tasks as a priest and as Bishop of Rome. So please forgive me for my absence this evening and enjoy the experience you are about to have..."
Here is Magister's second salvo, on his blog today (June 24):
The disconcertment over the concert snub
Translated from
June 24, 2013
In the issue of L'Osservatore Romano printed the afternoon of Saturday, June 23 [the Sunday issue o June 24], one reads:
On the occasion of the Year of Faith, the Pontifical Council for Promoting the New Evangelization has organized a concert which was to be held in the presence of Pope Francis, on the afternoon of Saturday, June 22, in the Vatican's Aula Paolo VI...
"It is always a great emotional experience to conduct Beethoven's Ninth," said Maestro Juraj Valčuha of the RAI National Symphony Orchestra, "but it will be even more so in a place like the Vatican in the presence of Pope Francis...'
Thus did 'the Pope's newspaper' announce the concert a couple of hours before it began, with a guarantee twice in as many sentences (three if we count the title) the presence of the Pope. –
But it all went otherwise. At the very last minute, Jorge Mario Bergoglio forfeited his attendance, leaving his special seat conspicuously empty in the middle of the concert hall.
It fell to an embarrasaed Mons. Rino Fisichella, who organized the concert, to give the Pope's explanation: "an urgent task that cannot be postponed".
News reports [in Italy] almost all referred to the Pope's gesture with approval and admiration.
But there were also some who criticized it, like Giuseppe Rusconi on his website 'Rossoporpora' in a commentsry entitled, "Pope Francis and music: A problematic relationship". We did so on www.chiesa in the article "The hundred days of Francis and the enigma of the empty seat".
One of our readers sent us the following letter:
Dear Magister,
Unfortunately, the decision at the last minute not to attend a performance of Beethoven's Ninth Symphony...was not a 'prophetic' gesture, given but not granted that one should continue using this word like idle prattle.
Papa Bergoglio seems to still be far from grasping that he is no longer just one of so many Catholic bishops around the world who each operates on a local level with local effects.
In any diocese, a pastor of strong personality, who then shows some brusque behavior in public, can easily be pardoned and can just as easily not care whether he is 'forgiven' or not. On the other hand, the 'Roman' gestures of a Pope have actually little relevance for Rome itself but very much for the whole Catholic world.
To leave that seat empty in front of the invited artists and guests - and not secondarily, in front of Beethoven [Not that any Pope must necessarily render homage to any musician!]= because he had work to do (not administering a sacrament with urgency to someone, but just 'must-do' work), sends a major message somewhere between a certain choice for efficientism and a kind of cultural deafness.
Listening to Beethoven's Ninth is always spiritual nourishment - the spirituality that is inherent in the arts - and even Popes need such nourishment. [Not really! Popes have so many other sources and ways of spiritual upliftment.]
It is possible that Papa Bergoglio does not like concerts. With his frankness, he could have said so earlier, thus not raising the expectations of the performers and the invited guests, and the organizers would not have set up that place of honor that was so conspicuous during the concert.
But that he considers going to a concert something like the behavior of a Renaissance prince (if he really said that) can only make one smile like an indulgent son. For two centuries, concerts have become a predominantly middle-class activity, avidly patronized even by various revolutionary and popular 'elites', and for quite some time, democratically accessible to all. Nihil obstat! (Without prohibitions]. [My own immediate reaction - as one of the hoi polloi who patronizes concerts and operas as far as my walletlets me.
In my opinion, it is not helpful to the image under construction of Pope Francis to add tassels of this genre that smack of moralism and little regard for form. Not just because even people who do not live in slums deserve respect. Not just because many 'poor' people, who would love to attend concerts if they could, would never criticize the Pope for doing so. [I often ask myself if those who say they 'love the poor' really know what it is to feel poor, and how much a poor man desires not to be poor!] [That's a new twist I didn't think of, as much as I have always been put off by 'bleeding-heart liberals'. But it is true that their attitude implies that 'the poor' they care so much about will never be other than 'poor', that they will always be objects of charity and never manage to get out of their neediness!]
But also because the continual equivocation about 'prophetic' gestures seems to be feeding on dangerous fantasies by those who anticipate a rapid metamorphosis and thus the symbolic and public dissolution of the very idea of the Papacy, and in general, to a so-called 'another Church'.
And that is certainly not the munus (function) - certainly not! - nor the intention of Pope Francis.
If you have not already read it, the English version of Magister's article on Francis's 100 days is on
chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/1350544?eng=y
John Allen's spin on the 'empty chair' and an unconfirmed story by Corriere della Sera claiming the Pope has abolished the institution called 'Gentlemen of His Holiness',in which he claims that a slow news day at the Vatican [the 100th day of this Pontificate a slow news day?]_and a tendency to 'over-interpret' Francis were the reason for all the furor over the empty chair, an be found here
ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/recipe-overinterpreting-pope
In fact, for the WonderPope that all media, including Catholic, have touted Pope Francis to be, there were remarkably few '100-day' assessments, and those that did appear, other than Allen's own piece
ncronline.org/news/vatican/francis-100-days-worlds-paris...
did not quite measure up to the 'paragon of Popes' image that has emerged about Pope Francis. Allen himself acknowledges that "Because there's been little substantive action, there's been little controversy" in these first 100 days, despite the Pope's crowd-drawing phenomenon which he compares to the crowds that came to the canonizations of Mother Teresa and Padre Pio.
[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 28/06/2013 04:47] |