What Cardinal Ratzinger Was Thinking in 2002
What Cardinal Ratzinger Was Thinking in 2002
Gave Interview With Journalists in Spain
VATICAN CITY, APRIL 22, 2005 (Zenit.org).- The proclamation of Christ
and his Gospel in a relativist world was for the future Pope Benedict XVI
one of the main challenges of the Church.
This is how Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, then prefect of the Congregation
for the Doctrine of the Faith, explained it on Nov. 30, 2002, in this
interview with journalists, among whom were several of ZENIT's writers.
The interview took place at St. Anthony's Catholic University of
Murcia, Spain, where the cardinal was attending an International Congress on
Christology.
We offer this long interview which reflects some of the characteristic
features of the new Pope, considered one of the most important
contemporary theologians.
Q: Some interpret the fact of proclaiming Christ as a rupture in the
dialogue with other religions. How can one proclaim Christ and dialogue
at the same time?
Cardinal Ratzinger: I would say that today relativism predominates. It
seems that whoever is not a relativist is someone who is intolerant. To think
that one can understand the essential truth is already seen as something
intolerant.
However, in reality this exclusion of truth is a type of very grave
intolerance and reduces essential things of human life to subjectivism.
In this way, in essential things we no longer have a common view. Each one
can and should decide as he can. So we lose the ethical foundations of our
common life.
Christ is totally different from all the founders of other religions,
and he cannot be reduced to a Buddha, a Socrates or a Confucius. He is really
the bridge between heaven and earth, the light of truth who has appeared to
us.
The gift of knowing Jesus does not mean that there are no important
fragments of truth in other religions. In the light of Christ, we can
establish a fruitful dialogue with a point of reference in which we can
see how all these fragments of truth contribute to greater depth in our
faith and to an authentic spiritual community of humanity.
Q: What would you say to a young theologian? What aspects of
Christology would you advise him to study?
Cardinal Ratzinger: Above all, it is important to know sacred
Scripture, the
living testimony of the Gospels, both of the Synoptics as well as the
Gospel
of St. John, in order to hear the authentic voice.
In the second place, the great councils, especially the Council of
Chalcedon, as well as subsequent councils that clarified the meaning of
that
great formula on Christ, true God and true man. The novelty that he is
really the Son of God, and really man, is not an appearance; on the
contrary, it unites God to man.
In the third place, I suggest further study in the paschal mystery: to
know
this mystery of the suffering and resurrection of the Lord, and in this
way
to know what redemption is; the novelty that God, in the person of
Jesus,
suffers, bears our sufferings, shares our life, and in this way creates
the
passage to authentic life in the resurrection.
This relates to the whole problem of human deliverance, which today is
understood in the paschal mystery; on one hand it is related to the
concrete
life of our time and, on the other, it is represented in the liturgy. I
think this nexus between liturgy and life is central, both founded in
the
paschal mystery.
Q: What has Cardinal Ratzinger learned that theologian Ratzinger did
not
already know?
Cardinal Ratzinger: The substance of my faith in Christ has always been
the
same: to know this man who is God who knows me, who -- as St. Paul says
--�
has given himself for me. He is present to help and guide me. This
substance
has always continued to be the same.
In the course of my life I have read the Church Fathers, the great
theologians, as well as present-day theology. When I was young,
Bultmann's
theology was determinant in Germany: existential theology. Then
Moltmann's
theology became more determinant: a theology of Marxist influence, so
to
speak.
I would say that at the present time the dialogue with the other
religions
is the most important point: to understand how, on one hand, Christ is
unique, and on the other, how he answers all others, who are precursors
of
Christ, and who are in dialogue with Christ.
Q: What must a Catholic university do, bearer of the truth of Christ,
to
make the evangelizing mission of Christianity present?
Cardinal Ratzinger: It is important that at a Catholic University one
not
learn just what prepares one for a certain profession. A university is
something more than a professional school, in which I learn physics,
sociology, chemistry. A good professional formation is very important,
but
if it was only this, it would be no more than a roof over different
professional schools.
A university must have as foundation the construction of a valid
interpretation of human existence. In the light of this principle we
can see
the place occupied by each one of the sciences, as well as our
Christian
faith, which must be present at a high intellectual level.
For this reason, a Catholic school must give fundamental formation in
the
questions of faith and especially of an interdisciplinary dialogue
between
professors and students so that together they can understand the
mission of
a Catholic intellectual in our world.
Q: Given the present quest for spirituality, many people take recourse
to
transcendental meditation. What difference is there between
transcendental
meditation and Christian meditation?
Cardinal Ratzinger: In a few words, I would say what is essential of
transcendental meditation is that man divests himself of his own "I";
he
unites with the universal essence of the world; therefore, he remains a
bit
depersonalized.
In Christian meditation, on the contrary, I do not lose my personality;
I
enter a personal relation with the person of Christ. I enter into
relation
with the "you" of Christ, and in this way this "I" is not lost; it
maintains
its identity and responsibility.
At the same time it opens, enters a more profound unity, which is the
unity
of love that does not destroy. Therefore, in a few words, I would say,
simplifying a bit, that transcendental meditation is impersonal and, in
this
sense, "depersonalizing." Christian meditation, meanwhile, is
"personalizing" and opens to a profound union that is born of love and
not
of the dissolution of the "I."
Q: You are the prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the
Faith,
formerly called the Inquisition. Many people are ignorant of the
Vatican
dicasteries. They think it is a place of condemnation. Of what does
your
work consist?
Cardinal Ratzinger: It is difficult to answer this in two words. We
have two
principal sections: one disciplinary and the other doctrinal.
The disciplinary must be concerned with problems of offenses of
priests,
which unfortunately exist in the Church. Now we have the great problem
of
pedophilia, as you know. In this case, above all, we must help the
bishops
to find the adequate procedures. And we are a sort of court of appeals:
If
someone feels unjustly treated by the bishop, he can appeal to us.
The other, better known section, is the doctrinal. In this connection,
Paul
VI defined our task as "promoter" and "defender" of the faith. To
promote,
that is, to help dialogue in the family of the theologians of the
world, to
follow this dialogue, and encourage the positive currents, as well as
to
help the less positive tendencies to be conformed to the more positive
ones.
The other dimension is to defend: In the context of today's world, with
its relativism, with a profound opposition to the faith of the Church in
many parts of the world, with agnostic, atheist, etc., ideologies, the loss
of the identity of the faith takes place easily. We must help to
distinguish authentic novelties, authentic progress, from other steps that imply a
loss of the identity of the faith.
We have two very important instruments at our disposal for this work,
the
International Theological Commission, with 30 theologians proposed for
five
years by the bishops; and the Biblical Commission, with 30 exegetes,
who are
also proposed by the bishops. They are forums of discussion for
theologians
to find, so to speak, an international understanding, including among
the
various schools of theology, and a dialogue with the magisterium.
For us, cooperation with the bishops is fundamental. If possible, the
bishops must resolve the problems. However, it is often theologians of
international renown [who resolve them] and, therefore, the problem
goes
beyond the possibilities of a bishop. So it is taken to the
congregation.
Here, we promote the dialogue with these theologians to arrive, if
possible,
to a peaceful solution. Only in very few cases is there a negative
solution.
Q: This past year has been difficult for Catholics, given the space
dedicated by the media to scandals attributed to priests. There is talk
of a
campaign against the Church. What do you think?
Cardinal Ratzinger: In the Church, priests also are sinners. But I am
personally convinced that the constant presence in the press of the
sins of
Catholic priests, especially in the United States, is a planned
campaign, as
the percentage of these offenses among priests is not higher than in
other
categories, and perhaps it is even lower.
In the United States, there is constant news on this topic, but less
than 1%
of priests are guilty of acts of this type. The constant presence of
these
news items does not correspond to the objectivity of the information
nor to
the statistical objectivity of the facts. Therefore, one comes to the
conclusion that it is intentional, manipulated, that there is a desire
to
discredit the Church. It is a logical and well-founded conclusion.
Q: There is a debate over the inclusion of the word of God and
references to
Europe's Christian past in the preambles of the future Constitution. Do
you
think there can be a united Europe that has turned its back on its
Christian
past?
Cardinal Ratzinger: I am convinced that Europe must not just be
something
economic [or] political; rather, it is in need of spiritual
foundations.
It is a historical fact that Europe is Christian, and that it has grown
on
the foundation of the Christian faith, which continues to be the
foundation
of the values for this continent, which in turn has influenced other
continents.
It is imperative to have a foundation of values and, if we ask
ourselves
what that foundation is, we realize that, beyond the confessions, there
are
no others outside the great values of the Christian faith. And this is
why
it is imperative that in the future Constitution of Europe mention is
made
of the Christian foundations of Europe.
I do not wish to fall into the error of constructing a political
Catholicism. The faith does not provide political recipes, but
indicates the
foundations. On one hand, politics has its autonomy, but on the other
there
is no total separation between politics and faith. There are
foundations of
the faith that later allow for political reasoning. The question,
therefore,
is what are these foundations that will enable politics to function?
What
are the aspects that must be left free?
In the first place, it is critical to have an anthropological moral
vision,
and here faith enlightens us. Is the person of God necessary to have
this
anthropological vision, which guarantees the freedom of political
reasoning?
A morality that dispenses with God, fragments, and, therefore, at least
the
great intuition that there is a God who knows us and who defines the
figure
of man as an image of God, belongs to these foundations. Moreover [to
mention God] is not an act of violence against anyone, it does not
destroy
anyone's freedom, but opens to all the free space to be able to
construct a
truly human, moral life.
Q: There are seminary professors of the Basque region who go so far as
to
justify ETA's terrorism, or who don't condemn it categorically. There
seem
to be connections between these priests and liberation theology. There
is
even talk of an indigenous Basque church. What decision can be made
against
this?
Cardinal Ratzinger: In this case, one simply applies what the
Congregation
for the Doctrine of the Faith said between the years 1984 [see
"Instruction
on Certain Aspects of the 'Theology of Liberation'"] and 1986 [see
"Instruction on Christian Freedom and Liberation"] on liberation
theology.
Christianity is certainly related to liberty, but true liberty is not
political liberty. Politics has its autonomy; this was emphasized above
all
by the Second Vatican Council and must not be constructed by faith as
such;
it must have its rationality.
One cannot deduce from sacred Scripture political recipes and much less
so
justifications of terrorism. I think that in regard to this specific
case
everything has been said in the two Instructions of our Congregation on
liberation theology.
The novelty of Christian messianism consists in the fact that Christ is
not
immediately the political messiah, who effects the liberation of
Israel, as
expected. This was the Barabbas model for the liberation of Israel,
which
they wanted to achieve immediately, including with terrorism.
Christ created another model of liberation, which was achieved in the
apostolic community and in the Church exactly as it has been
constituted,
conformed and witnessed in the New Testament. However, as mentioned,
everything has already been said in those two Instructions.
Q: If we made an evaluation of Pope John Paul II's extraordinary
activity,
what would be this papacy's most important contribution? How will
Christianity remember this Pope?
Cardinal Ratzinger: I am not a prophet; that is why I do not dare say
what
they will say in 50 years, but I think the fact that the Holy Father
has
been present in all areas of the Church will be extremely important.
In this way, he has created an extremely dynamic experience of
catholicity
and of the unity of the Church. The synthesis between catholicity and
unity
is a symphony -- it is not uniformity. The Church Fathers said it.
Babylon
was uniformity, and technology creates uniformity.
The faith, as seen at Pentecost where the apostles spoke all languages,
is
symphony: It is plurality in unity. This is manifested with great
clarity in
the Holy Father's pontificate, with his pastoral visits, his meetings.
I think some documents will be important forever: I want to mention the
encyclicals "Redemptoris Missio," "Veritatis Splendor," "Evangelium
Vitae"
and also "Fides et Ratio." These are four documents that will really be
monuments for the future.
Lastly, I think he will be remembered for his openness to the other
Christian communities, to the other religions of the world, to the
secular
world, to the sciences, to the political world. In these areas he has
always
made reference to the faith and its values, but at the same time he has
also
shown that the faith is able to enter into dialogue with everyone.
Q: What is John Paul II's contribution to interreligious dialogue?
Cardinal Ratzinger: The Holy Father sees his own mission as a mission
of
conciliation in the world, a mission of peace. Whereas in the past,
unfortunately, there were religious wars, the Holy Father wishes to
show
that the right relation between religions is not war, nor violence, it
is
dialogue, and the attempt to understand the elements of truth that are
found
in the other religions.
The Holy Father does not want to relativize the uniqueness of Christ,
who is
the Way, the Truth and the Life, but he wants to show that this truth
about
Christ cannot be proclaimed with violence or with human power, but only
with
the force of truth. And for this, a human contact of dialogue and love
is
necessary, as the apostles showed in the great mission of the early
Church:
without making use of worldly power, using the force of conviction.
The testimony of suffering, of charity, and of dialogue, convinced the
ancient world. The Holy Father simply tries to nurture this force of
dialogue and love of the first centuries in the relation with the
religions.
Q: It has been said that it is necessary to convoke a Vatican III so
that
the Church will adapt to the new times. What do you think?
Cardinal Ratzinger: First of all, I would say it is a practical
problem. We
have not implemented sufficiently the legacy of Vatican II. We are
still
working to assimilate and interpret this legacy, as vital processes
take
time. A technical measure can be applied rapidly, but life has paths
that
are much longer. Time is needed to grow a forest; time is needed for a
man
to grow.
Thus, these spiritual realities, such as the assimilation of a Council,
are
ways of life, which have need of a certain duration and cannot be
completed
from one day to the next. That is why the time has not yet arrived for
a new
Council.
This is not the primary problem, but it would also be a practical
problem:
We had 2,000 bishops for Vatican II, and it was already extremely
difficult
to have a meeting of dialogue. Now, we would have 4,000 bishops, and I
think
we would have to invent technique for dialogue.
I would like to recall something that happened in the fourth century, a
century of great Councils. When, 10 years after a Council, St. Gregory
Nazianzen was invited to participate in a new Council, he said: "No!
I'm not
going. Now we must continue to work on the other one. We have so many
problems. Why do you want to convoke another one immediately?" I think
that
this somewhat emotional voice demonstrates that time is required to
assimilate a Council.
In the time between two great Councils, other forms of contact are
necessary
among the episcopates: the synods of Rome, for example. Without a
doubt, it
is necessary to improve the procedure, because there are too many
monologues. We must really find a synodal process, a common way. Then
there
are the continental, regional, etc., synods, the effective work of the
episcopal conferences, the meetings of episcopal conferences with the
Holy
See.
In the course of five years, we [in the Roman Curia] see all the
bishops of
the world. We have improved these visits "ad limina" a lot, which
before
were very formal and now are genuine meetings of dialogue. Therefore,
we
must improve these instruments in order to have a permanent dialogue
among
all the areas of the Church and among all the areas of the Holy See, to
achieve a better application of Vatican Council II. And then, we will
see
...
Q: How can one maintain fidelity to the Church and favor communion,
while
remaining open to the Spirit to lead us to the fullness of truth? In
other
words, how is it possible not to fall into the extremes of rigidity or
rupture?
Cardinal Ratzinger: I think that it is, above all, a question of the
maturity of personal faith.
To all appearances, fidelity and openness seem to exclude one another.
However, I think that authentic fidelity to the Lord Jesus, to his
Church,
which is his Body, is a dynamic fidelity. The truth is for everyone,
and all
are created to go to the Lord. His open arms on the cross symbolize at
the
same time for the Church Fathers maximum fidelity -- the Lord is nailed
to
the cross -- and the embrace of the world, to attract the world to
himself,
and make room for all.
Therefore, an authentic fidelity to the Lord participates in the
dynamism of
the person of Christ, who can open himself to the different challenges
of
reality, of the other, of the world, etc. However, at the same time, he
finds his profound identity there, which does not exclude anything that
is
true; it only excludes falsehood.
To the degree that we enter into communion with Christ, in his love
that
accepts all of us and purifies all of us, in the measure in which we
participate in communion with Christ, we can be faithful and open.
Q: What is the present state of the ecumenical communication of the
concept
of Church? In the wake of the instruction "Dominus Iesus" of the
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, there were criticisms among
the
representatives of the Evangelical churches, because they did not
accept or
did not understand well the statement that, rather than churches, they
should be considered as Christian communities.
Cardinal Ratzinger: This topic would call for a long discussion. In the
first place, we were told that if in "Dominus Iesus" we had only spoken
about the unique character of Christ, the whole of Christianity would
have
been delighted with this document, all would have joined in applauding
the
Congregation. "Why did you add the ecclesiological problem that has
resulted
in criticisms?" we have been asked.
However, it was also necessary to talk about the Church, as Jesus
created
this Body, and he is present throughout the centuries through his Body,
which is the Church. The Church is not a hovering spirit.
I am convinced that we [in "Dominus Iesus"] have interpreted Vatican
II's
"Lumen Gentium" in a totally faithful manner, while in the last 30
years we
have increasingly attenuated the text. In fact, our critics have said
to us
that we have remained faithful to the letter of the Council, but we
have not
understood the Council. At least they acknowledge that we are faithful
to
the letter.
The Church of Christ is not an ecumenical utopia; it is not something
we
make; it would not be the Church of Christ. This is why we are
convinced
that the Church is a Body, it is not just an idea, but this does not
exclude
different ways of a certain presence of the Church, even outside the
Catholic Church, which are specified by the Council. I think it is
evident
that they exist, in so many hues, and it is understandable that this
generates debates within the Church.
Q: Do you think that the Church, especially in the Western world, is
prepared to address de-Christianization and the great void that is
left? Or
is there still among the men of the Church a vision of Christianity,
and not
of a missionary Church?
Cardinal Ratzinger: I think that in this connection, we have much to
learn.
We are too concerned with ourselves, with structural questions, with
celibacy, the ordination of women, pastoral councils, the rights of
these
councils [and] of synods ...
We always work on our internal problems and we do not realize that the
world
is in need of answers; it does not know how to live. The world's
inability
to live properly is seen in drugs, terrorism, etc. Therefore, the world
is
thirsty for answers -- and we remain with our problems.
I am convinced that if we go out to meet others, and we present the
Gospel
to them in an appropriate way, even our internal problems will be
relativized and resolved. This is a fundamental point: We must make the
Gospel accessible to today's secularized world.
Q: What do you think is the starting point to coordinate the growth of
humanity's technical and scientific power with faith and morality?
Cardinal Ratzinger: It is something that must be rediscovered, because
the
scientific models change; hence, the situation of dialogue between
science
and faith is faced with new challenges.
An important instrument, for example, is the Pontifical Academy of
Sciences,
of which I am now also a member and, in fact, a short while ago I
participated for the first time in one of it meetings.
To date, it was only an assembly of scientists -- physicists,
biologists,
etc. Now, philosophers and theologians have also joined. We have seen
that
dialogue between the sciences and philosophy and theology is difficult,
because they are totally different ways of addressing reality, with
different methods, etc.
One of these academics -- he was a specialist in human brain research
--�
said, "There are two irreconcilable worlds; on one hand we have the
exact
sciences for which, in their field, there is no freedom, there are no
presence of the spirit and, on the other hand, I realize that I am a
man and
that I am free."
Therefore, according to him, they are two different worlds -- and we do
not
have the possibility to reconcile these two perceptions of the world.
He
himself acknowledged that he believed in the two worlds: in science
that
denies freedom, and in his experience of being a free man.
However, we cannot live in this way; it would be permanent
schizophrenia. In
this present situation of acute methodological specialization on the
part of
both approaches, we must seek the way in which one discovers the
rationality
of the other, and develop a genuine dialogue.
For the time being, there is no formula. This is why it is extremely
important that proponents of the two approaches of human thought meet:
the
sciences, and philosophy and theology. In this way, they can discover
that
both are expressions of authentic reason. But they must understand that
reality is one and that man is one.
This is why it is very important that in universities and faculties
they not
be distinct disciplines separated from one another, but in permanent
contact, in which we learn to think with others and to find the unity
of
reality.
ZE05042227