The Blog

Click on titles below to read the entire post and to make comments.

  • A night to remember

    Five years ago...


  • Food for thought in pope's speech to diplomats

    Pope Francis this week delivered his annual “state of the world” talk to the diplomatic corps at the Vatican. It was one of his more far-ranging speeches, and his comments touched on several topics of particular interest to the United States:

    -- North Korea. The pope repeated his call to settle any international disputes by negotiation and agreement, not by recourse to arms, and added:

    "In this regard, it is of paramount importance to support every effort at dialogue on the Korean peninsula, in order to find new ways of overcoming the current disputes, increasing mutual trust and ensuring a peaceful future for the Korean people and the entire world."

    -- War and peace. More generally, the pope endorsed the church’s longstanding position that peace is not built through fear and intimidation, but through a dialogue in which “nations can discuss matters on equal terms.” A corollary, he said, is that multilateral diplomacy (i.e., engaging the international community) should have a key role in disputes between two countries.

    -- Weapons production and sales. The pope denounced the weapons industry and said the proliferation of arms has made modern conflicts more deadly. Citing Pope John XXIII's encyclical Pacem in Terris, he reiterated the Vatican’s full support for a ban on nuclear weapons:

    "The stockpiles of armaments which have been built up in various countries must be reduced all round and simultaneously by the parties concerned. Nuclear weapons must be banned. Indeed, even if it is difficult to believe that anyone would dare to assume responsibility for initiating the appalling slaughter and destruction that war would bring in its wake, there is no denying that the conflagration could be started by some chance and unforeseen circumstance.”

    -- Jerusalem. The pope called for respect of the status quo for Jerusalem, which puts him at odds with the Trump administration and its recent recognition of Jerusalem as the Israeli capital. The pope noted that the Vatican position is in conformity with United Nations resolutions. On the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the pope added: “Seventy years of confrontation make more urgent than ever the need for a political solution that allows the presence in the region of two independent states within internationally recognized borders.”

    -- Climate change. Once again, Pope Francis stated unequivocally that the global rise in temperatures and their “devastating effects” are a consequence of human activity. He called for nations to respect the 2015 Paris agreement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The Trump administration has announced it will withdraw from the agreement.

    -- Globalization. The pope in this speech focused on two worrisome aspects of globalization. One was economic:

    "On the one hand, we note an inequitable distribution of the work opportunities, while on the other, a tendency to demand of laborers an ever more pressing pace. The demands of profit, dictated by globalization, have led to a progressive reduction of times and days of rest, with the result that a fundamental dimension of life has been lost – that of rest – which serves to regenerate persons not only physically but also spiritually."

    The pope’s other concern was about a form of colonization by the world’s richer nations, particularly in areas where “debatable notions” of human rights have been advanced that are at odds with the culture of many countries”:

    "(These countries) feel that they are not respected in their social and cultural traditions, and instead neglected with regard to the real needs they have to face. Somewhat paradoxically, there is a risk that, in the very name of human rights, we will see the rise of modern forms of ideological colonization by the stronger and the wealthier, to the detriment of the poorer and the most vulnerable."

    The full text of the pope's speech is available here.

  • Pope Francis and nuclear deterrence

    As 2017 drew to a close, the potential for nuclear destruction was clearly on the mind of Pope Francis.

    During the Christmas season, the Vatican circulated a card reproducing a dramatic photo from the aftermath of the U.S. bombing of Nagasaki, Japan, in 1945. Taken by Marine photographer Joseph O’Donnell, it showed a boy carrying his dead brother on his back as he waited in line at a crematorium.

    On the reverse of the card is the phrase “The fruits of war” and the pope’s signature.

    The image reflected a deep concern that the pope has expressed on numerous occasions since his election in 2013: that nuclear deterrence, once seen as a necessary evil, may in fact be a path to global disaster.

    In November, addressing a Vatican-sponsored symposium on disarmament, the pope condemned not only the use or threatened use of nuclear weapons, but also their possession:

    Nor can we fail to be genuinely concerned by the catastrophic humanitarian and environmental effects of any employment of nuclear devices. If we also take into account the risk of an accidental detonation as a result of error of any kind, the threat of their use, as well as their very possession, is to be firmly condemned. For they exist in the service of a mentality of fear that affects not only the parties in conflict but the entire human race. International relations cannot be held captive to military force, mutual intimidation, and the parading of stockpiles of arms. Weapons of mass destruction, particularly nuclear weapons, create nothing but a false sense of security. They cannot constitute the basis for peaceful coexistence between members of the human family, which must rather be inspired by an ethics of solidarity.

    This was a significant development in the church’s position on nuclear weapons. Reporters asked the pope about it in early December, and while characterizing it as his “opinion” and not a change in official church teaching, Francis said nuclear deterrence was “at the limit of what’s licit”:

    In 34 years, nuclear [development] has gone further and further and further. Today we are at the limit. This can be argued; it is my opinion, but my staunch opinion: I am convinced of it. We are the limit of what’s licit in regard to having and using nuclear weapons. Why? Because today, with so sophisticated a nuclear arsenal, we risk the destruction of humanity, or at least of a large part of humanity. For this reason I refer to Laudato Si’. What has changed? This. The development of nuclear weaponry. What has also changed.... They are sophisticated and also cruel [weaponry]; they are also capable of destroying people without touching the structures.... We are at the limit, and since we are, I ask myself this question – not as papal Magisterium, but it is the question a Pope asks – today is it licit to maintain nuclear arsenals, as they are, or today, to save creation, to save humanity, is it not necessary to go back? … We are reaching a point at which man has in hand, with this culture, the capacity to create another form of lack of culture: let’s think of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And this was 60, 70 years ago. Destruction. And this also happens with atomic energy when we aren’t able to have complete control: think about the incidents in Ukraine. For this, getting back to weapons, which are to win by destroying, I say that we are at the limit of what’s licit.

    This is not an issue that will go away soon, and it’s one that raises an implicit challenge in U.S.-Vatican relations – particularly with a U.S. president who has said he wants a big increase in the country’s nuclear arsenal. 

    It was Pope Francis who, when addressing the United Nations in 2015, called on nations to work for a “complete prohibition” on nuclear weapons, a line that drew applause and was quickly forgotten.

  • On Christmas, pope looks to forgotten conflicts and underlying causes

    Pope Francis’ urbi et orbi blessing on Christmas day checked the expected boxes of global trouble spots, but added several other areas of tragic suffering that often don’t make the nightly news.

    Most of the coverage focused on the pope’s comments about Jerusalem: “On this festive day, let us ask the Lord for peace for Jerusalem and for all the Holy Land. Let us pray that the will to resume dialogue may prevail between the parties and that a negotiated solution can finally be reached, one that would allow the peaceful coexistence of two States within mutually agreed and internationally recognized borders.”

    President Trump recently announced that the United States recognizes Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, a decision that prompted the pope to appeal for preserving the “status quo” of the city. Israel has declared the entire city of Jerusalem to be its eternal capital, while Palestinians want East Jerusalem to be the capital of a future Palestinian state. Trump’s move was criticized by much of the international community.

    In his Christmas address, the pope turned attention to the suffering of children, particularly in Yemen, where he said “there is an ongoing conflict that has been largely forgotten, with serious humanitarian implications for its people, who suffer from hunger and the spread of diseases.” Saudi Arabia, with U.S. backing, has been bombing rebels in Yemen for more than two years, leaving an estimated 10,000 people dead and millions facing hunger or disease.

    The pope also cited civilian suffering, especially among children, in Syria, Iraq, South Sudan, Somalia, Burundi, Democratic Republic of Congo, Central African Republic and Nigeria.

    Francis’ broader target, however, was what he called “an outdated model of development" that "continues to produce human, societal and environmental decline.” (For a fuller treatment of this theme, see Chapter 2 of his 2013 document Evangelii Gaudium, “The Joy of the Gospel.”)

    On Christmas, he linked this larger issue of economic inequality to problems of global unemployment, widespread migration and human trafficking – injustices that inevitably impact children.

    “Through their eyes we see the drama of all those forced to emigrate and risk their lives to face exhausting journeys that end at times in tragedy,” he said.

    Here is the full text of the pope’s Christmas blessing:

    Dear Brothers and Sisters, Happy Christmas!


    In Bethlehem, Jesus was born of the Virgin Mary. He was born, not by the will of man, but by the gift of the love of God our Father, who “so loved the world that he gave his only-begotten Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life” (Jn 3:16).

    This event is renewed today in the Church, a pilgrim in time. For the faith of the Christian people relives in the Christmas liturgy the mystery of the God who comes, who assumes our mortal human flesh, and who becomes lowly and poor in order to save us. And this moves us deeply, for great is the tenderness of our Father.

    The first people to see the humble glory of the Savior, after Mary and Joseph, were the shepherds of Bethlehem. They recognized the sign proclaimed to them by the angels and adored the Child. Those humble and watchful men are an example for believers of every age who, before the mystery of Jesus, are not scandalized by his poverty. Rather, like Mary, they trust in God’s word and contemplate his glory with simple eyes. Before the mystery of the Word made flesh, Christians in every place confess with the words of the Evangelist John: “We have beheld his glory, glory as of the only-begotten Son from the Father, full of grace and truth” (Jn 1:14).

    Today, as the winds of war are blowing in our world and an outdated model of development continues to produce human, societal and environmental decline, Christmas invites us to focus on the sign of the Child and to recognize him in the faces of little children, especially those for whom, like Jesus, “there is no place in the inn” (Lk 2:7).

    We see Jesus in the children of the Middle East who continue to suffer because of growing tensions between Israelis and Palestinians. On this festive day, let us ask the Lord for peace for Jerusalem and for all the Holy Land. Let us pray that the will to resume dialogue may prevail between the parties and that a negotiated solution can finally be reached, one that would allow the peaceful coexistence of two States within mutually agreed and internationally recognized borders. May the Lord also sustain the efforts of all those in the international community inspired by good will to help that afflicted land to find, despite grave obstacles the harmony, justice and security that it has long awaited.

    We see Jesus in the faces of Syrian children still marked by the war that, in these years, has caused such bloodshed in that country. May beloved Syria at last recover respect for the dignity of every person through a shared commitment to rebuild the fabric of society, without regard for ethnic and religious membership. We see Jesus in the children of Iraq, wounded and torn by the conflicts that country has experienced in the last fifteen years, and in the children of Yemen, where there is an ongoing conflict that has been largely forgotten, with serious humanitarian implications for its people, who suffer from hunger and the spread of diseases.

    We see Jesus in the children of Africa, especially those who are suffering in South Sudan, Somalia, Burundi, Democratic Republic of Congo, Central African Republic and Nigeria.

    We see Jesus in the children worldwide wherever peace and security are threatened by the danger of tensions and new conflicts. Let us pray that confrontation may be overcome on the Korean peninsula and that mutual trust may increase in the interest of the world as a whole. To the Baby Jesus we entrust Venezuela that it may resume a serene dialogue among the various elements of society for the benefit of all the beloved Venezuelan people. We see Jesus in children who, together with their families, suffer from the violence of the conflict in Ukraine and its grave humanitarian repercussions; we pray that the Lord may soon grant peace to this dear country.

    We see Jesus in the children of unemployed parents who struggle to offer their children a secure and peaceful future. And in those whose childhood has been robbed and who, from a very young age, have been forced to work or to be enrolled as soldiers by unscrupulous mercenaries.

    We see Jesus in the many children forced to leave their countries to travel alone in inhuman conditions and who become an easy target for human traffickers. Through their eyes we see the drama of all those forced to emigrate and risk their lives to face exhausting journeys that end at times in tragedy. I see Jesus again in the children I met during my recent visit to Myanmar and Bangladesh, and it is my hope that the international community will not cease to work to ensure that the dignity of the minority groups present in the region is adequately protected. Jesus knows well the pain of not being welcomed and how hard it is not to have a place to lay one’s head. May our hearts not be closed as they were in the homes of Bethlehem.

    Dear Brothers and Sisters,
The sign of Christmas has also been revealed to us: “a baby wrapped in swaddling clothes” (Lk 2:12). Like the Virgin Mary and Saint Joseph, like the shepherds of Bethlehem, may we welcome in the Baby Jesus the love of God made man for us. And may we commit ourselves, with the help of his grace, to making our world more human and more worthy for the children of today and of the future.

  • Vatican tightens rules on relic distribution, veneration

    The Vatican this month issued tighter norms governing how relics are obtained, authenticated and venerated by the faithful.

    It might seem an arcane topic to many Catholics, but the Vatican takes it seriously, especially in an age in which relics can be bought and sold online and are vulnerable to other forms of abuse.

    The rules were published by the Congregation for Saints’ Causes, the Vatican agency that oversees canonizations, and confirms two trends at the Vatican: greater control over validating relics of saints, and discouragement of cutting up saints’ bodies.

    The congregation also emphasized that relics are not to be displayed in “profane” places, a concern that has increased in recent years as saints’ relics have been taken on popular exhibitions through countries around the world. For example, the right forearm of Saint Francis Xavier is about to go on a month-long, 12-city tour of Canada.

    I wrote extensively about the Vatican’s treatment of relics in my book, The Vatican Prophecies: Investigating Supernatural Signs, Apparitions, and Miracles in the Modern Age. It was clear to me that officials in Rome are today trying to preserve the ancient practice of relic veneration (which has never really gone out of style) but at the same time move away from the wholesale splicing and distribution of bone fragments.

    The new instruction states that “dismemberment of the body” is not allowed unless the congregation gives specific permission to a local bishop.

    When I was researching my book, I spoke with Monsignor Zdzislaw Kijas, a Polish Franciscan who worked in the sainthood congregation, who kindly explained many of the modern concerns about relics. Here is an excerpt from my book’s chapter, “A Piece of Holiness”:

    Traditionally, most relics have not been removed at the time of a holy person’s death, but only with the approach of beatification, when a tomb is moved to a more dignified location or during an exhumation to verify the condition of the body. This latter ceremony, known by the Latin term recognitio, is still generally performed today. And once the tomb is unsealed, it’s open season on relics – in theory, at least. Each sainthood cause has an appointed postulator, whose job is to guide the cause to the finish line and take care of documentation. It’s generally the postulator who, with the approval of the Vatican’s saints’ congregation, orders the removal of body parts for relics. In past centuries, such exhumations were the occasion of abuses, usually well-intentioned but over-the-top by modern standards. To give just one example, when the tomb of Saint Teresa of Avila was opened a year after her death in the late 1500s, the saint’s spiritual director, Father Jerónimo Gracián, cut off her left hand and had it sent to a Carmelite convent – except for her left ring finger, which he removed and wore around his neck for the rest of his life. In subsequent years, Saint Teresa’s relics were dispersed piece by piece, including the heart, the right arm, a foot, her left eye and a piece of jawbone. It became the focus of a bitter conflict among Catholic groups, and church officials sometimes cite the episode to illustrate the potential dangers of relic veneration.

    That wouldn’t happen today, Monsignor Kijas said. “If the body is intact, you can take some bone. But there is a hygienic element in all this, as well as respect for the body. You can’t just cut off parts at will. In some cases, there may be no relics removed.”

    Once the material is taken out, it’s carefully maintained and dispensed to pastors and church communities who follow the application procedure. Typically, a local parish will ask for the relics of a saint when dedicating a new church, for placement under the altar. When the archdiocese of Anchorage wanted a relic for the Saint Andrew Kim Taegon Church, dedicated to a Korean-born priest and martyr of the nineteenth century, they waited two years before authorities in Rome finally FedExed a piece of bone from the spine of the saint.

    Obtaining first-class relics has become more and more difficult, reflecting the trend away from carving up bodies. Increasingly, “officials are not taking bones from the tombs of prospective saints,” said Monsignor Enrico Viganò, a Vatican liturgist. Those asking for relics are more likely to receive an article of clothing or a prayer book used by the saint. In some cases, the relic falls into a gray area. In 1999, the Saint John Cantius Parish in Chicago received a relic of Saint Padre Pio of Pietrelcina, a widely venerated Italian Capuchin priest who died in 1968. It was not exactly a body part but a square of linen stained with blood from a laceration in the saint’s side, a wound known as the “transverberation of the heart” – in mystical tradition, a bleeding of the soul inflamed by the love of God. The Chicago parish proudly proclaims it a first-class relic.

    The size of relics has been a matter of debate among Vatican experts. When it revised its rules twenty years ago, the Vatican recommended that relics venerated in churches be big enough to be recognized as parts of the human body. That policy seems to have been ignored, in part because most of the relics in circulation today are fragments, and also because the severing of a saint’s arm or leg would strike many today as mutilation.

    “What we say now is that a relic should be visible. In other words, that it’s not powder, that it be visibly recognizable as a relic, something that can be seen or touched. In the past, we’ve had relics so small that you needed a magnifying glass to view it,” Monsignor Kijas explained. Especially in recent years, the trend of drawing blood or cutting hair immediately after death has won favor precisely because it does not require slicing up a body.

  • Pope Francis takes aim at Vatican officials who 'betray trust'

    Pope Francis’ annual Christmas speeches to the Roman Curia have become famous for their honest – some would say brutal – critiques of infighting, careerism and selfishness found in the top tier of the Vatican’s bureaucracy leadership.

    This year, the pope set his sights on in-house critics and “those who betray the trust put in them,” in particular Vatican officials who, when they find themselves sidelined from power, go around complaining of a “pope kept in the dark.”

    He urged the Roman Curia members to rise above the “unbalanced and debased mindset of plots and small cliques,” saying it represents a “cancer” inside the church and undermines the Curia’s role of service to the universal church.

    The pope also hinted that internal opposition was slowing down his ambitious plans to reform the Vatican bureaucracy, and he quoted a 19th-century Belgian archbishop, who once said: “Making reforms in Rome is like cleaning the Sphinx with a toothbrush.”

    The pope’s comments came at the end of a year in which several cardinals challenged him publicly on the issue of Communion for divorced Catholics; in which the Vatican’s top liturgy official tried to dismiss a papal shift on liturgical translations; and in which the Vatican’s departing doctrinal head slammed the door on his way out, complaining about the way he was dismissed.

    The most recently published book on Francis, “The Dictator Pope,” picks up on the unusually open level of tension between the pontiff and the traditional power centers of the Roman Curia.

    Pope Francis sometimes likes to give the impression that criticism rolls off his back. His talk to Curia officials Dec. 21, however, left no doubt that the pope is extremely sensitive to the fault-finding and second-guessing, and wants his team members rowing in sync.

    One key passage seemed to single out cardinals who, having been let go from their Vatican jobs, have continued to carp from the sidelines:

    Here let me allude to another danger: those who betray the trust put in them and profiteer from the Church’s motherhood. I am speaking of persons carefully selected to give a greater vigor to the body and to the reform, but – failing to understand the lofty nature of their responsibility – let themselves be corrupted by ambition or vainglory. Then, when they are quietly sidelined, they wrongly declare themselves martyrs of the system, of a “Pope kept in the dark”, of the “old guard”…, rather than reciting a mea culpa. Alongside these, there are others who are still working there, to whom all the time in the world is given to get back on the right track, in the hope that they find in the Church’s patience an opportunity for conversion and not for personal advantage.

    In another passage, the pope emphasized that the role of Vatican offices was above all service to the whole church. “A Curia closed in on itself would betray its own raison d’être and plunge into self-referentiality and ultimately destroy itself,” he said. That implies unity with the pope, he said:

    The relationship that these images suggest is that of communion in filial obedience for the service of God’s holy people. There can be no doubt, then, that such must be also the relationship that exists between all those who work in the Roman Curia. From the dicastery heads and superiors to the officials and all others. Communion with Peter reinforces and reinvigorates communion between all the members.

  • Pope Francis returns authority over liturgical translations to local bishops

    Pope Francis has issued a document that effectively returns to local bishops' conferences the leading role in liturgical translations.

    The move, which involved a modification of church law, reverses years of Vatican efforts to exert centralized control on the thorny issue of language in the liturgy. It is bound to set off a new round of criticism by conservative Catholics who fear that Francis is slowly undoing the legacy of his two predecessors.

    The pope's decision also underscored just how irrelevant the major Roman Curia departments have become under Pope Francis. In this case, the Congregation for Divine Worship (still headed by Cardinal Robert Sarah, one of the more conservative voices at the Vatican) was apparently sidelined. Instead, the pope appointed a commission to study the question and then issued his own document motu proprio ("on his own initiative"), a formula that the pope has used before to bypass internal Vatican resistance.

    Here is an English-language text of the pope's apostolic letter and a commentary by Archbishop Arthur Roche, secretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments:

    APOSTOLIC LETTER ISSUED MOTU PROPRIO OF THE SUPREME PONTIFF FRANCIS 

    MAGNUM PRINCIPIUM

    BY WHICH CAN. 838 OF THE CODE OF CANON LAW IS MODIFIED 

    The great principle, established by the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, according to which liturgical prayer be accommodated to the comprehension of the people so that it might be understood, required the weighty task of introducing the vernacular language into the liturgy and of preparing and approving the versions of the liturgical books, a charge that was entrusted to the Bishops. 

    The Latin Church was aware of the attendant sacrifice involved in the partial loss of liturgical Latin, which had been in use throughout the world over the course of centuries. However it willingly opened the door so that these versions, as part of the rites themselves, might become the voice of the Church celebrating the divine mysteries along with the Latin language. 

    At the same time, especially given the various clearly expressed views of the Council Fathers with regard to the use of the vernacular language in the liturgy, the Church was aware of the difficulties that might present themselves in this regard. On the one hand it was necessary to unite the good of the faithful of a given time and culture and their right to a conscious and active participation in liturgical celebrations with the substantial unity of the Roman Rite. On the other hand the vernacular languages themselves, often only in a progressive manner, would be able to become liturgical languages, standing out in a not dissimilar way to liturgical Latin for their elegance of style and the profundity of their concepts with the aim of nourishing the faith. 

    This was the aim of various Liturgical Laws, Instructions, Circular Letters, indications and confirmations of liturgical books in the various vernacular languages issued by the Apostolic See from the time of the Council which was true both before as well as after the laws established by the Code of Canon Law. 

    The criteria indicated were and remain at the level of general guidelines and, as far as possible, must be followed by Liturgical Commissions as the most suitable instruments so that, across the great variety of languages, the liturgical community can arrive at an expressive style suitable and appropriate to the individual parts, maintaining integrity and accurate faithfulness especially in translating some texts of major importance in each liturgical book. 

    Because the liturgical text is a ritual sign it is a means of oral communication. However, for the believers who celebrate the sacred rites the word is also a mystery. Indeed when words are uttered, in particular when the Sacred Scriptures are read, God speaks to us. In the Gospel Christ himself speaks to his people who respond either themselves or through the celebrant by prayer to the Lord in the Holy Spirit. 

    The goal of the translation of liturgical texts and of biblical texts for the Liturgy of the Word is to announce the word of salvation to the faithful in obedience to the faith and to express the prayer of the Church to the Lord. For this purpose it is necessary to communicate to a given people using its own language all that the Church intended to communicate to other people through the Latin language. While fidelity cannot always be judged by individual words but must be sought in the context of the whole communicative act and according to its literary genre, nevertheless some particular terms must also be considered in the context of the entire Catholic faith because each translation of texts must be congruent with sound doctrine. 

    It is no surprise that difficulties have arisen between the Episcopal Conferences and the Apostolic See in the course of this long passage of work. In order that the decisions of the Council about the use of vernacular languages in the liturgy can also be of value in the future a vigilant and creative collaboration full of reciprocal trust between the Episcopal Conferences and the Dicastery of the Apostolic See that exercises the task of promoting the Sacred Liturgy, i.e. the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, is absolutely necessary. For this reason, in order that the renewal of the whole liturgical life might continue, it seemed opportune that some principles handed on since the time of the Council should be more clearly reaffirmed and put into practice. 

    Without doubt, attention must be paid to the benefit and good of the faithful, nor must the right and duty of Episcopal Conferences be forgotten who, together with Episcopal Conferences from regions sharing the same language and with the Apostolic See, must ensure and establish that, while the character of each language is safeguarded, the sense of the original text is fully and faithfully rendered and that even after adaptations the translated liturgical books always illuminate the unity of the Roman Rite. 

    To make collaboration in this service to the faithful between the Apostolic See and Episcopal Conferences easier and more fruitful, and having listened to the advice of the Commission of Bishops and Experts that I established, I order, with the authority entrusted to me, that the canonical discipline currently in force in can. 838 of the C.I.C. be made clearer so that, according to what is stated in the Constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium, in particular in articles 36 §§3.4, 40 and 63, and in the Apostolic Letter Motu Proprio Sacram Liturgiam, n. IX, the competency of the Apostolic See surrounding the translation of liturgical books and the more radical adaptations established and approved by Episcopal Conferences be made clearer, among which can also be numbered eventual new texts to be inserted into these books. 

    Therefore, in the future can. 838 will read as follows: 

    Can. 838 - §1. The ordering and guidance of the sacred liturgy depends solely upon the authority of the Church, namely, that of the Apostolic See and, as provided by law, that of the diocesan Bishop. 

    §2. It is for the Apostolic See to order the sacred liturgy of the universal Church, publish liturgical books, recognise adaptations approved by the Episcopal Conference according to the norm of law, and exercise vigilance that liturgical regulations are observed faithfully everywhere. 

    §3. It pertains to the Episcopal Conferences to faithfully prepare versions of the liturgical books in vernacular languages, suitably accommodated within defined limits, and to approve and publish the liturgical books for the regions for which they are responsible after the confirmation of the Apostolic See

    §4. Within the limits of his competence, it belongs to the diocesan Bishop to lay down in the Church entrusted to his care, liturgical regulations which are binding on all. 

    Consequently this is how art. 64 §3 of the Apostolic Constitution Pastor Bonus as well as other laws are to be interpreted, particularly those contained in the liturgical books concerning their revision. Likewise I order that the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments modify its own “Regulations” on the basis of the new discipline and help the Episcopal Conferences to fulfil their task as well as working to promote ever more the liturgical life of the Latin Church. 

    Everything that I have decreed in this Apostolic Letter issued Motu Proprio must be observed in all its parts, notwithstanding anything to the contrary, even if it be worthy of particular mention, and I hereby set forth and I dispose that it be promulgated by publication in the daily newspaper L’Osservatore Romano, that it enter into force on 1 October 2017, and thereafter be published in Acta Apostolicae Sedis

    Given in Rome, at St. Peter’s, on 3 September of the year 2017, the fifth of my Pontificate 

    FRANCISCUS PP. 


    CONCILIAR AND POST CONCILIAR SOURCES

    On the occasion of the publication of the Motu Proprio Magnum principium, by which Pope Francis makes variations to can. 838 §§2 & 3 of the C.I.C., the Secretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments offers, in the following note, a commentary on the underlying sources of these paragraphs, taking into consideration the formulation in force until now as well as the new formulation. 

    The current text 

    Until now can. 838 §§2 & 3 read as follows: 

    §2. Apostolicae Sedis est sacram liturgiam Ecclesiae universae ordinare, libros liturgicos edere eorumque versiones in linguas vernaculas recognoscere, necnon advigilare ut ordinationes liturgicae ubique fideliter observentur. 

    §3. Ad Episcoporum conferentias spectat versiones librorum liturgicorum in linguas vernaculas, convenienter intra limites in ipsis libris liturgicis definitos aptatas, parare, easque edere, praevia recognitione Sanctae Sedis.1

    CANON 838 

    The references for §2 are the Instruction Inter Oecumenici (26 Sept 1964), n.21 and can. 1257 of the 1917 C.I.C. 

    For §3 they are Sacrosanctum concilium n.22 §2 and n.36 §§3-4; S. Congr. Pro Sacramentis et Cultu Divino, Epist. Decem iam annos (5 June 1976); S. Congr. Pro Doctrina Fidei, Ecclesiae pastorum (19 March 1975), art. 3. 

    Although the sources have a merely indicative value and are not exhaustive it is possible to make some remarks in their regard. 

    This is so above all regarding can. 838 §2. Inter Oecumenici n.21 is found in cap. I,VI. De competenti auctoritate in re liturgica (ad Const. art. 22) and reads as follows: “Apostolicae Sedis est tum libros liturgicos generales instaurare atque approbare, tum sacram Liturgiam in iis quae universam Ecclesiam respiciunt ordinare, tum Acta et deliberationes auctoritatis territorialis probare seu confirmare, tum eiusdem auctoritatis territorialis propositiones et petitiones accipere”.2 A clear presupposed equivalence appears between the verb “recognoscere” used in can. 838 §2 and the expression “probare seu confirmare” used in Inter Oecumenici. This latter expression was desired by the Liturgical Commission of the Second Vatican Council to substitute the terminology derived from the verb “recognoscere” (“actis recognitis”), referring to can. 250 §4 (cf. can. 304 §2) of the 1917 C.I.C., as was explained to the Council Fathers in the Relatio and voted on by them in Sacrosanctum concilium n.36 §3 in the form “actis ab Apostolica Sede probatis seu confirmatis”. It is also possible to note that Inter Oecumenici n.21 covers all acts of the territorial authorities, while the Code applies it specifically to the “interpretationes textum liturgicorum”, material that Inter Oecumenici n.40 deals with explicitly. 

    Regarding can. 838 §3 the reference to Sacrosanctum concilium n.22 §2 is pertinent. By referring to Sacrosanctum concilium n.36 §§3-4 (§3 deals with “de usu et modo linguae vernaculae statuere, actis ab Apostolica Sede probatis seu confirmatis” and §4 deals with “conversio textus latini in linguam vernaculam in Liturgia adhibenda, a competenti auctoritate ecclesiastica territoriali, de qua supra, approbari debet”) it is clear how, for translations, neither a probatio seu confirmatio nor a recognitio in the strict juridical sense of can. 455 §2 is required. 

    The story of the Apostolic Letter issued Motu Proprio Sacram Liturgiam n. IX (25 Jan 1964), which had to be corrected in Acta Apostolicae Sedis because of the reaction of the Council Fathers, seems not to have been adequately taken into consideration. When Sacram Liturgiam appeared in L’Osservatore Romano on 29 January 1964 it read: “...populares interpretationes, a competente auctoritate ecclesiastica territoriali propositas,3 ab Apostolica Sede esse rite recognoscendas4 atque probandas”5. However in Acta Apostolicae Sedis the conciliar terminology was adopted: “...populares interpretationes, a competente auctoritate ecclesiastica territoriali conficiendas et approbandas esse, ad normam art. 36, §§3 et 4; acta vero huius auctoritatis, ad normam eiusdem art. 36, §3, ab Apostolica Sede esse rite probanda seu confirmanda”6. Thus the Motu Proprio Sacram Liturgiam distinguished the approval of translations as such on the part of territorial authorities with a decree that rendered them obligatory, and the fact that such an act had to be “probatus seu confirmatus” by the Apostolic See. Moreover, one must note that Sacram Liturgiam adds: “Quod ut semper servetur praescribimus, quoties liturgicus quidam textus latinus a legitima, quam diximus, auctoritate in linguam vernaculam convertetur”.7 This ordinance regards both of these distinct moments, namely the conficere et approbare of a translation and the act of making it obligatory with the publication of the book that contains it. 

    The reference to the Epist. Decem iam annos (5 June 1976) of the S. Congr. Pro Sacramentis et Cultu Divino is relevant but it must be noted that it never uses the term “recognoscere” but only “probare, confirmare, confirmatio”. 

    Turning to Ecclesiae pastorum of the S. Congr. Pro Doctrina Fidei, art.3 (made up of three numbers), only n.1 is relevant to our material. It reads: “1. Libri liturgici itemque eorum versions in linguam vernaculam eorumve partes ne edantur nisi de mandato Episcoporum Conferentiae atque sub eiusdem vigilantia, praevia confirmatione Apostolicae Sedis”.8 N. 2 concerns reissues and n. 3 prayer books. However it must be noted that the oversight and the mandate are attributed to the Episcopal Conferences while the “praevia confirmatio”, concerning the book that is published, is attributed to the Apostolic See. This is not precisely a “recognitio” of the version like that found in can. 838. 

    The new text

    With the changes decided by the Motu Proprio Magnum principium can. 838 §§2 & 3 read as follows: 

    §2. Apostolicae Sedis est sacram liturgiam Ecclesiae universae ordinare, libros liturgicos edere, aptationes, ad normam iuris a conferentia Episcoporum approbatas, recognoscere, necnon advigiliare ut ordinationes liturgicae ubique fideliter observentur. 

    § 3. Ad Episcoporum Conferentias spectat versions librorum liturgicorum in linguas vernaculas fideliter et convenienter intra limites definitos accommodatas parare et approbare atquae libros liturgicos, pro regionibus ad quas pertinent, post confirmationem Apostolicae Sedis edere.9 

    §2 now relates to the “aptationes” (“versiones” are no longer mentioned, such material is dealt with in §3), namely the texts and elements that do not form part of the editio typica latina, as well as the “profundiores aptationes” foreseen by Sacrosanctum concilium n.40 which are regulated by the Instruction Varietates legitimae on the Roman Liturgy and Inculturation (25 January 1994); after approval by the Episcopal Conference the “aptationes” must have the “recognitio” of the Apostolic See. The reference here is to Sacrosanctum concilium n.36 §3. The adjustment to §2 maintains can. 1257 of the 1917 C.I.C. among its sources, and adds the reference to the Instruction Varietates legitimae which deals with the application of nn.39 & 40 of Sacrosanctum concilium for which a full “recognitio” is required. 

    §3 relates to the “versiones” of the liturgical texts, which it more clearly specifies must be done “fideliter” and approved by the Episcopal Conferences. The reference is to Sacrosanctum concilium n.36 §4 and analogously to can. 825 §1 concerning the version of Scared Scripture. These versions are published in liturgical books after receiving the “confirmatio” of the Apostolic See, as laid down by the Motu Proprio Sacram Liturgiam, n. IX. 

    The previous formulation of can. 838 §3 “intra limites in ipsis libris liturgicis definitos aptatas”, comes from Sacrosanctum concilium n.39 (“Intra limites in editionibus typicis librorum liturgicorum statutos...aptationes definire”), concerning the “aptationes” and not the “versiones” which are now dealt with by this paragraph so it is now rendered with the expression “intra limites definitos accommodatas”, drawing on the terminology of the Istitutio Generalis Missalis Romani n.392; this allows an opportune distinction to be made in respect of the “aptationes” mentioned in §2. 

    Therefore, the readjusted §3 continues to be founded on Sacrosanctum concilium n.22 §2; n.36 §§3-4; S. Congr. Pro Sacramentis et Cultu Divino, Epist. Decem iam annos (5 iun. 1976); S. Congr. Pro Doctrina Fidei, Ecclesiae pastorum (19 mart. 1975), art. 3, with the addition of the reference to the Institutio Generalis Missalis Romani (ed. typica tertia) nn.391 & 392, avoiding, however, the term “recognoscere, recognitis” in such a way that the act of Apostolic See relative to the versions prepared by the Episcopal Conferences with particular fidelity to the Latin text (see the addition of the word fideliter) cannot be equated to the discipline of can. 455, but once again forms part of the action of a confirmatio (as expressed in both Decem iam annos and Ecclesiae pastorum, art.3). 

    The “confirmatio” is an authoritative act by which the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments ratifies the approval of the Bishops, leaving the responsibility of translation, understood to be faithful, to the doctrinal and pastoral munus of the Conferences of Bishops. In brief, the “confirmatio”, ordinarily granted based on trust and confidence, supposes a positive evaluation of the faithfulness and congruence of the texts produced with respect to the typical Latin text, above all taking account of the texts of greatest importance (e.g. the sacramental formulae, which require the approval of the Holy Father, the Order of Mass, the Eucharistic Prayers and the Prayers of Ordination, which all require a detailed review). 

    As the Muto Proprio Magnum principium itself recalls the changes to can. 838, §§2 & 3 have consequences for the Apostolic Constitution Pastor bonus art. 64 §3 as well as for the Istitutio Generalis Missalis Romani and for the Praenotanda of the liturgical books in the places that touch on material related to translation and adaptations. 

    __________________________________________________

    1 §2. It is for the Apostolic See to order the sacred liturgy of the universal Church, publish liturgical books and recognise their translations in vernacular languages, and exercise vigilance that liturgical regulations are observed faithfully everywhere.

    §3. It pertains to the conferences of bishops to prepare and publish, after the prior review of the Holy See, translations of liturgical books in vernacular languages, adapted appropriately within the limits defined in the liturgical books themselves. 

    2 “The Holy See has the authority to reform and approve the general liturgical books; to regulate the liturgy in matters affecting the universal Church; to approve or confirm the acta and decisions of the territorial authorities; and to accede to their proposals and requests.”
    3 Art. 36 §4 of SC uses the verb “approbare”. 

    4 Art 36 §3 of SC says: “actis ab Apostolica Sede probatis seu confirmatis”. “enactments approved, that is, confirmed, by the Holy See.”

    5 L’Osservatore Romano 29 January 1964, 1. “...vernacular versions proposed by the competent territorial ecclesiastical authority must always be recognised and approved by the Holy See.” 

    6 Cf. AAS 56 (1964), 143. “...vernacular versions must be drawn up and approved by the competent, territorial ecclesiastical authority, as provided in art. 36 §§3 & 4; and that, as provided in art. 36 §3, the acts of this authority require due approval, that is, confirmation, of the Holy See.”

    7 Cf. ibidem. “This is the course to be taken whenever any Latin liturgical text is translated into the vernacular by the authority already mentioned.” 

    8 “1. Liturgical books, including vernacular translations or parts thereof, are to be published only by mandate of the Conference of Bishops and under its supervision, after confirmation by the Holy See.”

    9 §2. It is for the Apostolic See to order the sacred liturgy of the universal Church, publish liturgical books, recognise adaptations approved by Conferences of Bishops according to the norm of law, and exercise vigilance that liturgical regulations are observed faithfully everywhere. 

    §3. It pertains to the Conferences of Bishops to faithfully prepare versions of the liturgical books in vernacular languages, suitably accommodated within defined limits, and to approve and publish the liturgical books for the regions for which they are responsible after the confirmation of the Apostolic See

    A key to reading the motu proprio “Magnum principium”

    The new Motu Proprio Magnum principium has altered the formulation of some norms of the Codex iuris canonici regarding the translation of liturgical books into modern languages. 

    Pope Francis has introduced some modifications to the text of canon 838 in this Motu Proprio, dated 3 September 2017 and entering into force from 1st October 2017. The reason for these changes is explained in the papal text itself, which recalls and explicates the principles which underlie translations of the Latin typical editions as well as the delicacy required by those who undertake such work. Because the Liturgy is the prayer of the Church it is regulated by ecclesial authority. 

    Given the importance of this work, the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council had already considered the question of the roles of both the Apostolic See and the Episcopal Conferences in this regard (cf. Sacrosanctum concilium, nn.36, 40 & 36). In effect the great task of providing for liturgical translations was guided by norms and by specific Instructions from the competent Dicastery, in particular Comme le prévoit (25 January 1969) and then, after the Codex iuris canonici of 1983, by Liturgiam authenticam (28 March 2001), both published at different stages with the goal of responding to concrete problems which had become evident over the course of time and which had arisen as a result of the complex work that is involved in the translation of liturgical texts. The material relating to the whole field of inculturation was, on the other hand, regulated by the Instruction Varietates legitimae (25 January 1994). 

    Taking into account the experience of these years, the Pope writes that now “it seemed opportune that some principles handed on since the time of the Council should be more clearly reaffirmed and put into practice”. Thus, taking account of the experience during the course of these years and with an eye to the future based on the liturgical constitution of Vatican II, Sacrosanctum concilium, the Pope intends to clarify the current discipline by introducing some changes to canon 838 of the Codex iuris canonici

    The object of the changes is to define better the roles of the Apostolic See and the Conferences of Bishops in respect to their proper competencies which are different yet remain complementary. They are called to work in a spirit of dialogue regarding the translation of the typical Latin books as well as for any eventual adaptations that could touch on rites and texts. All of this is at the service of the Liturgical Prayer of the People of God. 

    In particular, in the new formulation of the said canon, there is a more adequate distinction, as far as the role of the Apostolic See is concerned, between the scope of the recognitio and that of the confirmatio in respect of what belongs to the Episcopal Conferences, taking account of their pastoral and doctrinal responsibility as well as the limits to their actions. 

    The recognitio, mentioned in canon 838 §2, implies the process of recognising on the part of the Apostolic See legitimate liturgical adaptations, including those that are “more radical” (Sacrosanctum concilium 40), which the Episcopal Conferences can establish and approve for their territories within defined limits. In the encounter between liturgy and culture the Apostolic See is called to recognoscere, that is, to review and evaluate such adaptations in order to safeguard the substantial unity of the Roman Rite: the references for this material are Sacrosanctum concilium nn. 39-40; and its application, when indicated in the liturgical books and elsewhere, is regulated by the Instruction Varietates legitimae

    The confirmatio – terminology already adopted in the motu proprio Sacram Liturgiam n. IX (25 January 1964) – pertains instead to the translations of liturgical texts which, on the basis of Sacrosanctum concilium (n.36, §4), are within the competency of the Episcopal Conferences to prepare and approve; canon 838 §3 clarifies that the translations must be completed fideliter according to the original texts, thus acknowledging the principal preoccupation of the Instruction Liturgiam authenticam. Indeed, recalling the right, and the grave responsibility of translation entrusted to the Episcopal Conferences, the motu proprio also points out that the Conferences “must ensure and establish that, while the character of each language is safeguarded, the sense of the original text should be rendered fully and faithfully”. 

    The confirmatio of the Apostolic See is therefore not to be considered as an alternative intervention in the process of translation, but rather as an authoritative act by which the competent Dicastery ratifies the approval of the bishops. Obviously, this presupposes a positive evaluation of the fidelity and congruence of the texts produced in respect to the typical editions on which the unity of the Rite is founded, and, above all, taking account of the texts of greatest importance, in particular the Sacramental formulae, the Eucharistic Prayers, the prayers of Ordination, the Order of Mass and so on. 

    Naturally, this modification to the Codex iuris canonici entails an adjustment to the Apostolic Constitution Pastor bonus n.64 §3, as well as to the norms surrounding translations. This means, for example, that it will be necessary to readjust some numbers of the Institutio generalis missalis Romani and of the Praenotanda of the liturgical books. The Instruction Liturgiam authenticam itself, which is to be appreciated for the attention it brings to bear on this complicated work and its implications, must be interpreted in the light of the new formulation of canon 838 when it speaks about seeking the recognitio. Finally, the motu proprio provides that the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments will also “modify its own Regolamento on the basis of the new discipline and help the Episcopal Conferences to fulfil their task”. 

    +Arthur Roche 

    Archbishop Secretary Congregation for Divine Worship & the Discipline of the Sacraments.

  • Pope calls for World Day of the Poor at close of mercy jubilee

    In a document closing the jubilee Year of Mercy, Pope Francis called for an annual “World Day of the Poor” to underline the church’s solidarity with the world’s suffering, and extended special faculties to forgive the sin of abortion.

    The pope’s document, Misericordia et Misera (Mercy and Misery), proposed ways to keep the spirit of mercy alive in all aspects of the church’s life, from the confessional to its social programs.

    The World Day of the Poor would be celebrated in November (on the 33rd Sunday of Ordinary Time in the church’s liturgical year.) Pope Francis said it would help Catholics “reflect on how poverty is at the very heart of the Gospel” and recall that God will judge people on their works of mercy toward the poor.

    The pope cautioned against merely theorizing about mercy instead of sharing in the lives of the poor. By “hand-crafting” works of mercy and engaging with others, the church can lead a “cultural revolution, beginning with simple gestures capable of reaching body and spirit, people’s very lives,” he said.

    “There is no alibi to justify not engaging with the poor when Jesus has identified himself with each of them,” he said. While acts of mercy depend on individuals, they have an “immense positive influence” as a social value, and can help restore dignity to millions of people, he said.

    In one of the final papal encounters of the Year of Mercy, Pope Francis celebrated Mass Nov. 11 in St. Peter's Basilica for about 6,000 poor and homeless. At that time, he spoke about making it an annual day dedicated to the poor.

    In his document, the pope said he was extending the faculty, granted to all priests during the Holy Year, to absolve those confessing the sin of abortion. Normally this is something reserved to bishops and priests designated by bishops, but the pope said he wanted to underline that while abortion is always a “grave sin” because it puts an end to innocent life, “there is no sin that God’s mercy cannot reach and wipe away when it finds a repentant heart.”

    The pope also extended “until further provisions are made” the right of faithful to validly confess to priests of the traditionalist group, the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X, with which the Vatican has conducted a long and painful dialogue aimed at reconciliation.

    The pope said he was also extending the pastoral program of the “Missionaries of Mercy,” priests appointed by the pope to preach and confess in various parts of the world.

    It was important, the pope said, that mercy not be seen as “a mere parenthesis in the life of the church.”

    He emphasized a point he has made again and again during the jubilee year: that “forgiveness is the most visible sign of the Father’s love.”

    “Nothing of what a repentant sinner places before God’s mercy can be excluded from the embrace of his forgiveness. For this reason, none of us has the right to make forgiveness conditional,” he said.

  • The pope's plea against an 'epidemic of animosity and violence'

    Pope Francis created 17 new cardinals Saturday and urged them to counter the “epidemic of animosity and violence” that is spreading in the world.

    The pope’s message reflected his vision of a church that is more merciful than judgmental, but it also appeared to be aimed at a wider audience – including the United States. In particular, the pope described how easy it is for immigrants to be marginalized and turned into the “enemy.”

    “Little by little, out differences turn into symptoms of hostility, threats and violence,” he said.

    “In God’s heart there are no enemies. God only has sons and daughters. We are the ones who raise walls, build barriers and label people.

    The pope emphasized that the church is not immune from this "virus of polarization and animosity." Church leaders, he said, need to be vigilant "lest such attitudes find a place in our hearts."

    A key passage of the pope's homily is worth reading in full (my emphases):

    Ours is an age of grave global problems and issues. We live at a time in which polarization and exclusion are burgeoning and considered the only way to resolve conflicts. We see, for example, how quickly those among us with the status of a stranger, an immigrant, or a refugee, become a threat, take on the status of an enemy. An enemy because they come from a distant country or have different customs. An enemy because of the color of their skin, their language or their social class. An enemy because they think differently or even have a different faith. An enemy because… And, without our realizing it, this way of thinking becomes part of the way we live and act. Everything and everyone then begins to savor of animosity. Little by little, our differences turn into symptoms of hostility, threats and violence. How many wounds grow deeper due to this epidemic of animosity and violence, which leaves its mark on the flesh of many of the defenseless, because their voice is weak and silenced by this pathology of indifference! How many situations of uncertainty and suffering are sown by this growing animosity between peoples, between us!

    Yes, between us, within our communities, our priests, our meetings. The virus of polarization and animosity permeates our way of thinking, feeling and acting. We are not immune from this and we need to take care lest such attitudes find a place in our hearts, because this would be contrary to the richness and universality of the Church, which is tangibly evident in the College of Cardinals. We come from distant lands; we have different traditions, skin color, languages and social backgrounds; we think differently and we celebrate our faith in a variety of rites. None of this makes us enemies; instead, it is one of our greatest riches.

    It’s significant that one of those receiving his red hat was Cardinal Joseph Tobin, who as archbishop of Indiana denied a request by Indiana Governor – now Vice President-elect – Mike Pence to put a halt to Catholic Charities’ resettlement of a Syrian refugee family. A federal court later blocked Pence’s move, saying it was discriminatory.

    The pope's words came the same week that President-elect Donald Trump confirmed his intention of deporting up to three million undocumented immigrants from the United States and his plan of building a wall along the U.S.-Mexican border.

  • Pope calls out critics on pastoral mercy, ecumenism

    Another day, another interview with Pope Francis. This one, in the Italian Catholic newspaper Avvenire, focused on ecumenism, and the pope took the opportunity to defend his bridge-building efforts with other Christian churches.

    He also delivered a rebuke to those who have recently critiqued his document, Amoris Laetizia, for its opening on the question of Communion for divorced and remarried Catholics. Critics, he said, don’t really understand the church’s role in the world.

    “The church exists only as an instrument for communicating to people the merciful design of God,” he said. That was clearly enunciated by the Second Vatican Council in its document on the nature of the church, he said.

    “This moves the axis of Christian understanding away from a certain legalism, which can be ideological, to the person of God who made himself merciful in the incarnation of the Son,” he said.

    “Some – consider certain replies to Amoris Laetitia – continue to not understand, (to see) either white or black, even though it is in the flow of life that one must discern,” the pope said. He added that this teaching of Vatican II will probably take a century to be “well absorbed” by the body of the church.

    “We’re at the halfway point,” he said.

    The pope’s reproach of those who want a “white or black” judgment of pastoral situations plainly referred to a small group of cardinals who this week published a letter to the pontiff, challenging him to clarify supposed “doubts” about Amoris Laetitia, the pope’s post-synodal document published in April. The cardinals have questioned whether some sections of the document could be read as contradicting traditional church teaching on marriage.

     In the interview, Francis said seeking Christian unity was a perennial task of any pope, and he described it as primarily a work of encounter and prayer, not negotiation. He said his recent meetings did not represent an “acceleration” of this process. It’s simply a matter of following the path of the Second Vatican Council, and the impetus comes from “the path, not me,” he said.

    At one point the interviewer noted that some conservative critics have accused the pope of “selling out doctrine” in order to promote ecumenical relations, and in effect “Protestantizing” the Catholic Church.

    “I’m not losing any sleep over that,” the pope replied. He added that the value of criticism depended on “the spirit behind it.” Authentic criticism can help the church, but sometimes it’s obvious that the criticisms “are not honest, and are made with a bad spirit in order to foment divisions, he said.”

    The pope said he was convinced that certain “rigorous” positions among critics are born from “a shortcoming, a desire to hide one’s own sad disappointment behind a type of armor.”

    On the issue of proselytism, there was this exchange:

    Pope Francis: "The church never grows through proselytism but by attraction, as Benedict XVI wrote. Therefore proselytism between Christians is in itself a grave sin."

    Interviewer: "Why?"

    Pope Francis: "Because it contradicts the very dynamic of how one becomes and remains a Christian. The church is not a soccer team in search of fans."

RSS Feed