|
|
|
 |
Ratzinger's mustard
seed By Spengler
That
an earthly agency might hold the key to the
kingdom of heaven is a fond hope of mankind, such
that the passing of the Vicar of Christ touches
even those who long since rejected that hope. Into
whose hand will the key pass? News reports suggest
that the succession may fall to Joseph Cardinal
Ratzinger, the Vatican's chief theologian. With no
way to game the odds that this might happen, I
think it worth noting that Ratzinger is one of the
few men alive capable of surprising the world. Ten
years ago, he shocked the Catholic world with this
warning:
We might have to part with the
notion of a popular Church. It is possible that
we are on the verge of a new era in the history
of the Church, under circumstances very
different from those we have faced in the past,
when Christianity will resemble the mustard seed
[Matthew 13:31-32], that is, will continue only
in the form of small and seemingly insignificant
groups, which yet will oppose evil with all
their strength and bring Good into this world.
[1] He added, "Christianity might
diminish into a barely discernable presence,"
because modern Europeans "do not want to bear the
yoke of Christ". The Catholic Church, he added,
might survive only in cysts resembling the
kibbutzim of Israel. He compared these cysts to
Jesus' mustard seed, faith of whose dimensions
could move mountains. Ratzinger's grim forecast
provoked a minor scandal, complete with coverage
in Der Spiegel, Germany's leading newsmagazine.
The offending sentences did not appear in the
English translation, "Salt of the Earth", and were
not discussed further in polite Catholic company.
Cardinal Ratzinger is a Prince of the
Church who threatened, as it were, to abandon the
capital and conduct guerrilla war from the
mountains. Years before Europe's demographic
death-spiral was apparent, Ratzinger had the
vision to see and the courage to say that the
Catholic Church stood on the brink of a
catastrophic decline. This observation is now
commonplace. As George Weigel, John Paul II's
biographer, wrote in March, "Europe, and
especially Western Europe, is in the midst of a
crisis of civilizational morale ... Europe is
depopulating itself at a rate unseen since the
Black Death of the 14th century." [2] He
continued:
The demographics are unmistakable:
Europe is dying. The wasting disease that has
beset this once greatest of civilizations is not
physical, however. It is a disease in the realm
of the human spirit ... Europe ... is boring
itself to death. Europe's current demographic
trend lines, coupled with the radicalization of
Islam that seems to be a by-product of some
Muslims' encounter with contemporary,
secularized Europe, could eventually produce a
22nd-century, or even late-21st-century, Europe
increasingly influenced by, and perhaps even
dominated by, militant Islamic populations ...
it is allowing radicalized 21st-century Muslims
- who think of their forebears' military defeats
at Poitiers in 732 ... as temporary reversals en
route to Islam's final triumph in Europe - to
imagine that the day of victory is not far
off. Weigel blames "a lethal explosion
of atheistic humanism" in the form of World War I
for Europe's decline. That cannot be quite true,
for World War I burst out of the Balkans conflict
between Catholic Austria-Hungary and Orthodox
Russia. The messianic Slavophiles of the court of
Czar Nicholas II confronted the most Catholic of
all European entities, the multinational empire of
the Habsburgs. France, to be sure, also incited
Russia to mobilize, but it was the Catholic French
army rather than the secular parties who most
wanted war.
It would be more accurate to
say that "atheistic humanism" was the residue spot
left on the ground after the Catholic Universal
Empire had exploded. Catholic Europe spent its
first 10 centuries absorbing hosts of invaders.
Its genius was syncretic: each tribe could retain
aspects of natural religion in the form of
specific saints, rituals, and so forth, within the
Catholic umbrella. That is the tragic weakness of
this great project, as I have argued elsewhere.
[3]
The Universal Empire model collapsed
with the Thirty Years' War, although not, as the
usual explanation goes, because of the fanaticism
of the Catholic and Protestant combatants. The
Thirty Years' War became an artifact of French
policy. France under Cardinal Richelieu first
identified its own national glory with the
salvation of the Christian world (Sacred heart of darkness,
February 11, 2003). Messianic nationalism became
the rival of Universal Empire, and the delusion of
messianic nationalism passed from France to Russia
and then to Germany, with ruinous consequences.
The United States of America created a
different, Protestant sort of universality,
calling on the nation's immigrants to abandon
their cultures and form a new people. The US might
represent the only workable Protestant model.
Without the weight of Church authority to suppress
tribal eruptions, European Protestantism too
easily became the bearer of a perverse, neo-pagan
nationalism. For all the opprobrium heaped on the
Vatican Nuncio in Germany, the future Pius XII,
the Catholic Church offered far more resistance to
Adolf Hitler than did the German Protestant
churches.
I doubt that the Catholic model
ever again will provide a template for human
society, but I am loath to see the Catholic
message diluted or diminished. Our guesses about
the direction of human events are no more than
that; no human being has cracked the code of
history. Until a generation ago, Christian opinion
was nearly unanimous that the New Covenant had
superseded the miserable remnant that clung to the
Old Covenant of Judaism. The return of the Jews to
Jerusalem persuades many Christians that the Jews
yet may have a role to play. If the Jews can raise
themselves from the ashes, what shall we think
about the prospects for the Church that embodied
Western civilization for so many centuries?
In the US, the Catholic Church tends
toward the model of a social-welfare agency,
replete with the social mores of the political
left, culminating in the sex-abuse scandal of the
past several years. [4] In Latin America,
"liberation theology" turned large parts of the
Church into a quasi-revolutionary political
movement. These efforts were doomed to failure.
What religions do to ameliorate social or
political conditions is incidental; religions
exist because humankind is terrified of death.
John Paul II and Cardinal Ratzinger
belonged to the "Augustinian" minority of senior
clergy who tried to steer the Church back to its
fundamental mission, namely repentance and
salvation. Anthony Mansueto of the University of
New Mexico, a left-wing critic, remonstrates
bitterly against this current:
[Around Vatican II] a new
Augustinian Right emerged which regarded
Neo-Thomism and Social Catholicism as too
focused on the social apostolate and ineffective
in communicating what they saw as the essential
message of Christianity: human sinfulness and
God's offer of forgiveness. This group, which
developed around the journal Communio,
and which includes both the current pope and his
chief theologian, Joseph Ratzinger, but of whom
the most important theological representative
was Hans Urs von Balthasar, explicitly rejects
both the "cosmological" approach of historic
Thomism, which rises to God through an attempt
to explain the natural world, and the
"anthropological" approach of the conciliar (and
in a different way the liberation) theologians,
in favor of an "esthetic" approach which gives
priority to the passive reception of the
self-sacrificial gift of Christ on the cross.
The effect is a sort of clericalized
Lutheranism. [5] Mansueto intends the
term "clericalized Lutheranism" as an insult, but
there is a grain of truth here. John Paul II's
Augustinian leaning made him more of a unifying
figure in the Christian world, in particular among
US evangelicals. The scriptural rather than
philosophical emphasis of the Augustinian current,
moreover, deepened the late pope's instinctive
sympathy for Judaism, the scriptural religion
par excellence.
Ratzinger was not
only the Vatican's chief theologian, but John Paul
II's closest theological collaborator. From his
first academic work on St Bonaventure, Ratzinger
took the Protestant bull by the horns. Scriptural
revelation is an act by which God reveals himself,
he argued, and revelation requires someone to whom
revelation is made manifest. He wrote in his
autobiography:
The word "revelation" refers to the
act in which God shows himself, and not to the
objectified result of this act. Part and parcel
of the concept of revelation is the receiving
subject. Where there is no one to perceive
revelation, no re-vel-ation has occurred
because no veil has been removed. By
definition, revelation requires a someone who
apprehends it. [6] For Ratzinger, this
"someone" is of course the Church, as opposed to
the Protestant contention that each individual
must read Scripture for himself. By making
revelation the subject of discourse, though, the
Augustinian Ratzinger may have more in common with
evangelical Christians than with the neo-Thomists
of his own Church. For the first time, Catholic
congregations in the US south are attracting the
sort of people who normally would join evangelical
denominations. On the surface, the US Church is
deteriorating, bulked up by Hispanic immigrants
but losing clergy and parochial-school attendance.
I consider the odds very small, but cannot rule
out that the Wojtyla-Ratzinger current yet might
turn out to be the mustard seed of which Ratzinger
wrote. It is not, as some suggest, that the US
Catholic Church has assimilated into the ambient
Protestant culture of US, but rather that a
Catholic current of ancient lineage might compete
with evangelical Christianity on its own terms.
The popular media have assigned Ratzinger
the image of a dour conservative, cracking down on
dissenting theologians. Quite the opposite might
be the case: as pope, Ratzinger might conceivably
become something of a unifying figure in the
Christian world.
From an institutional
vantage point the Church appears weakened beyond
repair. Not only the faith but also the faithful
are at risk. I hold out no hope for today's
Europeans. But Ratzinger places his hopes on the
purely spiritual weapons that made Christianity a
force to begin with. He has said, in effect, "I
have a mustard seed, and I'm not afraid to use
it." I do not know, of course, whether he will
have the opportunity, but were he to ascend to the
throne of St Peter, the next papacy might be more
interesting than the last one.
Notes: 1. In Salz der Erde, Im
Gespraech mit P Seewald (Christentum und
katholische Kirche an der Jahrtausendwende
Stuttgart, DVA Verlag, 1996). 2. American Enterprise
Institute. 3. Why Europe chooses
extinction, April 8, 2003. 4. See Catholicism - isn't that a gay
thing?, August 22, 2003. 5. Anthony
Mansueto, "The political significance of the
papacy, historically and in the present period",
Journal of Religion and Society, Vol 7 (2005).
6. Milestones: Memoirs 1927-1977,
Ignatius Press, 1999.
(Copyright 2005
Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved. Please
contact us for information on sales, syndication and republishing.) |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
All material on this
website is copyright and may not be republished in any form without written
permission.
© Copyright 1999 - 2005 Asia Times
Online Ltd.
|
|
Head
Office: Rm 202, Hau Fook Mansion, No. 8 Hau Fook St., Kowloon, Hong
Kong
Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
|
|
|
|