POPE FRANCIS IN FULL CONTINUITY WITH POPE SAINT JOHN PAUL II by Prof. Rocco Buttiglione & CARDINAL MULLER ON POPE FRANCIS

Pope Francis Appears to Be Discerning “Decentralization” of Authority

Synod acts “with Peter and under Peter,” says Pope, while suggesting Peter’s role may evolve
Elizabeth ScaliaOctober 17, 2015Pope Francis (C) attends a vigil prayer on the eve of the XIV General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops at St Peter’s basilica on October 3, 2015 at the Vatican.  

Marking the fiftieth anniversary of the Synod of Bishops, Pope Francis spoke of the many and distinct challenges facing pastors as they strive to understand and serve the people of the church with a synodal spirit that expresses an evolving unity with the faithful. He urged the bishops, all the clergy, and the laity to listen mindfully to each other, saying, “A synodal church is a listening church, aware that listening is more than hearing. It is a reciprocal listening in which each one has something to learn.”

“The only authority is the authority of service,” said the Pope, adding, “the only power is the power of the cross.

“Those who exercise authority are called ‘ministers,’ because, according to the original meaning of the word, they are the least of all. It is serving the people of God that each bishop becomes, for the portion of the flock entrusted to him, vicarius Christi, vicar of the Jesus who at the Last Supper stooped to wash the feet of the apostles.”

Signalling an openness toward an idea of what might be called “spiritual subsidiarity,” the pope referenced his Petrine ministry as one that has been intended “to enhance the role of synod, which is one of the most precious legacies of the last Vatican council. The pope is not, by himself, above the Church [but] called at the same time—as successor of Peter—to lead the Church of Rome,” which has primacy within all the churches, and that the synod always acts cum Petro et sub Petro—with Peter and under Peter—which, rather than indicating a restriction of freedom, is a guarantor of unity. “Indeed, it is the path of collegiality that God expects from the Church of the third millennium.” The bishop of Rome, he said, is “the perpetual and visible source and foundation of the unity both of the bishops and the multitude of the faithful.”

Citing Pope Saint John Paul II, Francis then expressed a sense of discernment that may bring discomfort to some—words that will challenge the “listening skills” of many. In a synodal church, said Francis, “it is not appropriate for the Pope to replace the local Episcopates in the discernment of all the problems that lie ahead in their territories. In this sense, I consider the need to proceed with a healthy ‘decentralization.’ While I reiterate the need and urgency to think of ‘a conversion of the papacy,’ I willingly repeat the words of my predecessor Pope John Paul II, who said, ‘As Bishop of Rome I know […] that Christ ardently desires the full and visible communion of all those communities in which, by virtue of God’s faithfulness, his Spirit dwells.’”

“I am convinced,” continued the pontiff, “that I have a particular responsibility in this regard, above all in acknowledging the ecumenical aspirations of the majority of the Christian Communities and in heeding the request made of me to find a way of exercising the primacy which, while in no way renouncing all that is essential to its mission, is nonetheless open to a new situation.”

All that God asks of us “is already contained in the word ‘synod.’ Walking together—lay faithful, pastors, the Bishop of Rome—it is an easy concept to put into words but not so easy to put into practice.”

Journeying together requires respectful engagement and—referencing the current synod—Francis gave an example of what reciprocal listening means: “How would it be possible to talk about the family without consulting families, listening to their joys and their hopes, their sorrows and their troubles? Thanks to the responses we received to the questionnaires that were sent to the local churches, we were able to hear at least some of these, covering issues that affect them closely and on which they have a great deal to say … a synodal church is a church that listens. It is a mutual listening in which everyone has something to learn. Faithful people, the College of Bishops, the Bishop of Rome: one listening to others; and all listening to the Holy Spirit.

“Synodality as a constitutive dimension of the Church, gives us the most appropriate interpretive framework to understand the hierarchical ministry, if we understand, as St. John Chrysostom said, that the ‘church and synod are synonymous’” because the Church is none other than the “‘walking together of the flock of God on the paths of history to meet Christ the Lord. We understand well that inside no one can be ‘higher’ than the other. On the contrary, the Church needs those who ‘lower’ themselves in service to their brothers and sisters along the way.”

Jesus’ admonition that “whoever wishes to become great among you shall be as a servant; whoever wishes to be first among you shall be as a slave,” is relevant to this, the pope reminded, as “the successor of Peter is none other than the servant of the servants of God.”

Today’s event opened with an introductory speech by the General Secretary of the Synod of Bishops , Cardinal Lorenzo Baldisseri, and a commemorative address by Cardinal Christoph Schönborn, Archbishop of Vienna and President of the Austrian Bishops’ Conference, who pointed out, “The aim of the [synod] discussions, the aim of these witnesses is to achieve a common understanding of God’s will. Also, when we vote (as we do at the end of every synod), it is not about power struggles, faction formation (which the media is only too glad to pounce on), it is about this process of forming a communal judgement.

“The final outcome, we hope, will not be a political compromise on a lowest common denominator, but an ‘added value’ given by the Holy Spirit so that in the end we can say: ‘We have decided, the Holy Spirit and us.’

“For the past fifty years the same question of whether there should just be one ‘consultative vote’ as well as a ‘deliberative vote’ has emerged again and again. But bishops are not representatives in the same way members of parliament are. Representation takes on a different meaning in the ecclesial structure that is founded on the principle of communion and known through faith. Faith, however, cannot be represented but only testified. The aim of the [synod] discussions,” Schönborn concluded, “the aim of these witnesses is to achieve a common understanding of God’s will.”

Excerpted from Vatican Insider. Writer John Thavis has a provisional translation of the pope’s full remarks.


- See more at:
http://aleteia.org/2015/10/17/pope-francis-appears-to-be-discerning-decentralization-of-authority/#sthash.6DeetRJb.dpuf

My Notes on the Subject:
We have the advantage of being able to listen in on the preparation for the Holy and Great Council of the Orthodox churches which will help us understand what Pope Francis is trying to do.

Let us take the Orthodox attitude to ecumenism.  With Patriarch Bartholomew and many from the Greek tradition, they acknowledge that, if there were a healing of the schism, Pope Francis, as successor of St Peter, would be “first among equals”, and, as “protos”, would be able to actively promote collaboration at a universal level, so that all the local churches would be able to act as one single organic body.  The Patriarch of Moscow, on the other hand, would deny any authority whatsoever of the Roman Church over Moscow or any other regional church.  However, the Patriarch is in favour of as close a cooperation as possible and, even now in spite of the schism, close cooperation between Rome and Moscow in mutually agreed activities on a world scale.   On the other hand, there are many Orthodox, on Athos, in Russia, and among converts from Protestantism in America, who believe that there is no grace outside the Orthodox communion, and hence no sacraments.  For them, the Pope is simply a non-Christian layman: they are modern Donatists.  Nevertheless, they all accept and identify themselves as members of the same Orthodox Church.   They can only declare as the doctrine of their Council what they can agree on with unanimity.  The rest must be kept for a future council.

This is also the option adopted by Pope Francis.  Cardinal Burke, Cardinal Schornborn and the pope all agree that Christian marriage is indissoluble; that someone who is validly married cannot have a valid marriage to another person while the first spouse lives, and that sex outside the valid marriage is adultery.  Where they differ is in the pastoral consequences of that teaching.  Cardinal Burke believes that Catholic teaching and canon law are identical, that the canon law cannot be changed because that involves changing the teaching, and that pastoral practice must conform to canon law.   Pope Francis and Cardinal Schonborn, on the other hand, believe that, in pastoral practice, there are more factors at work than those covered by the law.  God is a Saviour, not a lawyer  They don’t disagree with the basic doctrine, but by applying traditional categories of thought used in other areas of theology but not, till now, applied within the context of marriage, they favour a different pastoral practice.

Professor Rocco Bertiglione shows us how this is done.  Here is another example: Protestant ministers are not validly ordained and their Eucharist is invalid as well; and hence, they are ecclesial communities and not churches; yet close contact with them can reveal that they live a profoundly Christian life, and their invalid sacraments are an intricate part of that life.  God is he who leaves the ninety-nine sheep and saves the shepp that is lost where he finds it.  The same can be said for an invalid marriage – invalid because one or both were validly married before, so they contracted a second marriage in a registry office.Then they become fervent Catholics and they bring up the children as Catholics, pray, are generous to their neighbours and active in the parish.  They seem to be model Catholics, and their pastor believes that they living a deep, authentic Christian life and love the Lord.  Only one thing is missing: they are not married validly.  They are too weak to live as brother and sister, and cannot separate because of the children.   The priest can discern that, in spite of their irregular situation, their invalid marriage has many Christian features, and even seems to be a source of grace, like the ecclesial community, and he does not believe that trying to break up the union would have good results.  Can he direct them to receive communion, seeing that they are not excommunicated?

Pope Francis recognises that there is real disagreement between the pastoral advice given in Africa and that given in Germany.  He believes that these differences should be acknowledged.  Following the line of Pope Benedict XVI who said that it is not the pope’s role to impose beliefs, but rather to remind everyone what they really believe deep down as Catholics, he will not follow the Vatican practice of censorship, nor will he impose a “Vatican view”.  While stressing the central doctrine, he will acknowledge the differences, urging people to treat each other with charity.  This has been acknowledged by Cardinal Burke, that Amoris Laetitia is not an exercise the the pope’s magisterium: just a personal view which leaves people who support a more rigourous view perfectly free to differ.  In line with this open acknowledgement of differences, Pope Francis is trying to persuade th Lefebrist Society of Pius X to return to Catholic unity.

The disagreements between Pope Francis and some Bishops
my source: Catholic Say

These days, when the classic Catholic parlor game of deciding who in the Vatican is for the pope and who’s against him gets underway, German Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller often figures near the top of most lists for the latter camp.

Prefect of the Vatican’s powerful Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and thus an indirect heir to Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger before he became Pope Benedict XVI, Müller is perceived as a doctrinal conservative often struggling to hold the line against the more revolutionary tendencies unleashed under Pope Francis.

There are, of course, exceptions to every rule. Müller, for instance, is a close friend of Gustavo Gutierrez and a supporter of a moderate form of liberation theology. In general, however, he’s not seen as an especially “Francis” kind of guy, often perceived as representing the traditional yin to the pope’s maverick yang.

To hear Müller himself tell it, however, that’s just plain bunk.

On May 3, Müller was at the Universidad Francisco de Vitoria in Madrid, Spain, taking some questions from students and faculty. Inevitably, one was about whether the Vatican’s doctrinal czar feels uncomfortable with some of the more “ambiguous” things this pope says and does.

In fact, Müller claimed, there’s an explicit division of labor at work between his office and Francis, hatched from the very start three years ago. (Remember that Müller, 68, took office under Pope Benedict XVI in 2012.)

“At the beginning of his pontificate, we spoke with Pope Francis, observing that during the previous pontificates the press accused the Church of talking only about sexuality, of abortion and these problems,” Müller said.

“For this reason, we decided, with Francis, to always, always, always speak in a positive way. If you look at the complete texts of Pope Francis, there’s gender ideology, abortion … yes, these problems are still there, but we concentrate on the positive.”

That’s not a matter of “revolution,” Müller said, insisting that Francis “is in line with his predecessors.”

“His originality,” he said, “is his charisma, thanks to which he succeeds in overcoming people’s blocks and their hardened positions.”

To hear Müller tell it, the strategy is paying off.

“I think all of us can see, from the reaction of the press, that today there’s less aggression against the Church,” Müller said. “It’s not that everybody is becoming Catholic, clearly, but at least they’re talking about other things.”

He gave a concrete example of how the pope’s cachet actually allows him to push traditional Catholic messages in ways that other popes would have found difficult.

“Pope Francis has the courage to speak of the devil,” Müller said.

“If Benedict would have said what Francis says today about the devil, he would have been called retrograde and medieval. But our pope has the charisma to say these things: the devil exists, he’s at work and is very evil, and whoever welcomes his suggestions is guilty.”

According to Müller, his ability to rupture such taboos is the fruit of Francis’s pastoral nature.

“Pope Francis has his own style,” he said. “He says he feels like a pastor, and that the doctrine is already very clear in the texts of Benedict XVI … He says, ‘go forward with the theology,’ but he maintains his charisma of knowing how to communicate with people, who need that charisma.”

One could, of course, look on these statements with a degree of skepticism.

It’s natural to ask if Müller is perhaps slightly exaggerating his own role in crafting Francis’ spontaneous, shoot-from-the-hip style. It’s also possible to wonder if Müller’s insistence that what we have is a “positive” pope, not an “ambiguous” one, is to some extent a PR exercise calculated to calm anxious conservatives.

Nonetheless, Müller’s robust defense of the pope in Madrid does confirm one key point about reaction to Francis, both within the Vatican and among many Catholic bishops around the world.

Speaking to many prelates these days, especially those of a more conservative bent, you can often find a degree of ambivalence on certain points – whether Francis’ eco-encyclical Laudato Si’, for example, was too uncritical in embracing the agenda of the secular environmental movement, or whether his cautious opening to Communion for the divorced and remarried in Amoris Laetitia may lend itself to abuse.

If you phrase the question, however, as whether those prelates would like to roll the clock back to March 12, 2013, before Francis was elected, and see things turn out differently, a solid majority will say “no,” and mean it.

In the main, that’s because many agree with Müller, that whatever its downside, this pope’s “charisma” has reduced hostility towards the Church in many sectors of the culture, including the press, and thereby created some breathing room for Catholicism to go about its business without the same constant fear of assault.

In effect, it allows Church leaders to catch their breath, to take a break from always putting out fires, and to ponder what comes next.

The next time, therefore, the “blues v. grays” exercise heats up about which bishops are with the pope and which are against him, this is a point worth recalling: At the end of the day, you don’t have to be with Francis on everything to regard him, net-net, as a blessing.

By By John L. Allen Jr.