Benedict XVI Speaks Informally to Priests - "We Christians Must Be Ready to Explain Our Faith"

Zenit News Agency ^ | May 20, 2005

[NYer]

VATICAN CITY, MAY 20, 2005 (Zenit.org).- Here is a translation of the spontaneous speech given by Benedict XVI to the clergy of Rome on May 13, in the Basilica of St. John Lateran, after hearing the priests' testimonies and questions.

* * *

At the end, I can only say "thank you" for the richness and depth of these contributions, where a Presbytery full of enthusiasm, of love for Christ and for the flock entrusted to us and of love for the poor is evident. And not only of the city of Rome, but truly of the universal Church, of all our brothers and sisters. Thank you also for the affection you have expressed for me; it helps me greatly.

Presently, I do not feel in a position to enter into details regarding what has been said. It would be good to continue a true discussion, and I hope that it will be possible to have a concrete question-and-answer discussion.

Now, I simply express my gratitude for everything. I truly perceive your pastoral dedication, I perceive your desire to build the Church of Christ here in Rome, I perceive your reflections on how to do better, I perceive how all springs forth from a great love for the Lord and the Church.

I would only like to touch on three or four points that have remained in my mind. You have spoken of this "Roman" and "universal" interlacement. For me, this seems to be a very important point.

On the one hand, this is an authentic local Church that must live as such. There are some people who suffer, who live, who want to believe or are unable to believe. It is here, in the parishes, that the Church of Rome must grow with her great responsibility for the world as she carries within herself this mandate, in a certain way, of "exemplarity"; in this way, there appears in the Church of Rome the face of the Church as such, and it is a model for other local Churches. To be a model, we ourselves must be a local Church that is busy each day in the humble work demanded by this "being Church," in a determined place at a determined time.

You have spoken of the parish as a fundamental structure, assisted and enriched by movements. And it seems to me that precisely during the pontificate of Pope John Paul II, a fruitful combination between the constant elements of the parochial structure and, let us say, the "charismatic" element, was created, which offers new initiatives, new inspirations, new life. Under the wise guidance of the Cardinal Vicar and the Auxiliary Bishops, all parish priests can together be truly responsible for the growth of the parish, taking in all of the factors that can come from the movements and the living reality of the Church in varied dimensions.

But I wanted to speak once more about this Roman and universal interlacement. One of our brothers spoke of our responsibility towards Africa. We have seen how, in Rome, Africa is present, India is present, the universe is present. And this presence of our brothers and sisters obliges us to think not only of ourselves, but to feel precisely in this moment of history, in all of these circumstances with which we are familiar, the presence of the other Continents.

It seems to me that at this time we have a particular responsibility towards Africa, towards Latin America and towards Asia, where Christianity -- with the exception of the Philippines -- is still a very large minority, even if in India it is growing and shows itself a strength for the future. And so, we also think of this responsibility.

Africa is a continent that has enormous potential and the enormous generosity of the people, with an impressive, living faith. But we must confess that Europe exported not only faith in Christ, but also all of the vices of the Old Continent.

It exported the sense of corruption, it exported the violence that is currently devastating Africa. And we must acknowledge our responsibility so that the exportation of the faith, an answer to the intimate hope of every human being, is stronger than the exportation of the vices of Europe. This seems to me a great responsibility.

The weapons trade is still alive, with the exploitation of the earth's goods. We Christians must do much more in these regards so that faith is made present, and with faith, the strength to resist these vices and to rebuild a Christian Africa, destined to be a happy Africa, a great Continent of new humanism.

Something was then said about the need, on one hand, to proclaim, to speak, but on the other, also to listen. To me, this seems important in two ways.

The priest, deacon, catechist and Religious must, on the one hand, proclaim, be witnesses. But naturally, for this they must listen, in a two-fold sense: on the one hand, with their soul open to Christ, interiorly listening to his Word so that it is assimilated and transformed and forms my being; and on the other, listening to today's humanity, our neighbors, those of my parish, those for whom I have been given a certain responsibility.

Naturally, listening to the world of today that exists also in us, we listen to all the problems, all the difficulties that are contrary to faith. And we must be able to seriously take upon ourselves these problems.

In his First Letter, St. Peter, the first Bishop of Rome, says that we Christians must be ready to explain our faith. This presupposes that we ourselves have understood the reason of faith, that we have truly "digested," even rationally, with the heart, with the wisdom of heart, this word that can truly be an answer for others.

In the First Letter of St Peter, in the Greek text, with a fine play on words, it is written: "apologia," the answer to the "logos," of the reason for our faith. And so, the "logos," the reason for the faith, the word of faith, must become the answer of faith. And we know well that the language of faith is often very far from today's men and women; it can bring them close only if it becomes in us our modern-day language. We are contemporary, we live in this world, with these thoughts, these emotions. If it is transformed in us, one can find the answer.

Naturally, I am aware and we all know that many are not immediately able to identify themselves with, to understand, to assimilate all that the Church teaches. It seems to me important firstly to awaken this intention to believe with the Church, even if personally someone may not yet have assimilated many particulars. It is necessary to have this will to believe with the Church, to have trust that this Church -- the community not only of 2,000 years of pilgrimage of the people of God, but the community that embraces heaven and earth, the community where all the righteous of all times are therefore present -- that this Church enlivened by the Holy Spirit truly carries within the "compass" of the Spirit and therefore is the true subject of faith.

The individual, then, is inserted into this subject, adheres to it, and so, even if he or she is still not completely penetrated by this, the person has trust and participates in the faith of the Church, wants to believe with the Church. To me, this seems like our lifelong pilgrimage: to arrive with our thought, our affections, with our entire life at the communion of faith. We can offer this to everyone, so that little by little one can identify and especially take this step over and over again to trust in the faith of the Church, to insert themselves in this pilgrimage of faith, so as to receive the light of faith.

To conclude, I would like once more to say "thank you" for the contribution expressed here regarding Christocentrism, the requirement for our faith to be ever nourished by personal encounter with Christ, a personal friendship with Jesus.

Romano Guardini correctly said 70 years ago that the essence of Christianity is not an idea but a Person. Great theologians have tried to describe the essential ideas that make up Christianity. But in the end, the Christianity that they constructed was not convincing, because Christianity is in the first place an Event, a Person. And thus in the Person we discover the richness of what is contained. This is important.

And here I think we also find an answer to a difficulty often voiced today regarding the missionary nature of the Church. From many comes the temptation to think this way regarding others: "But why do we not leave them in peace? They have their authenticity, their truth. We have ours. And so, let us live together in harmony, leaving all persons as they are, so that they search out their authenticity in the best way."

But how can one's personal authenticity be discovered if in reality, in the depth of our hearts, there is the expectation of Jesus, and the genuine authenticity of each person is found exactly in communion with Christ and not without Christ? Said in another way: If we have found the Lord and if he is the light and joy of our lives, are we sure that for someone else who has not found Christ he is not lacking something essential and that it is our duty to offer him this essential reality?

We then leave what will transpire to the direction of the Holy Spirit and the freedom of each person. But if we are convinced and we have experienced the fact that without Christ life is incomplete, is missing a reality, the fundamental reality, we must also be convinced that we do harm to no one if we show them Christ and we offer them in this way too the possibility to discover their true authenticity, the joy of having discovered life.

In closing, I would like to say "thank you" to all who make up the Presbytery and the Ecclesial Community of Rome, to the parish and vice-parish priests, to all who collaborate in the various offices, to deacons, catechists and above all to the men and women religious who are somewhat the "heart" of the ecclesial life of a Diocese. Thank you for this witness that you give.

Let us all go forward together, moved by the love of Christ. And in this way, we will succeed!

[NYer]

Ping!

[sinkspur]

This guy is really GOOD, speaking off the cuff as eloquently and clearly as if he had written what he said.

And, at least to me, BXVI is much clearer and to the point than JPII. He's very familiar with his audiences (meaning he speaks to them as if in a dialogue), continuing a trend begun by JPII.

But how can one's personal authenticity be discovered if in reality, in the depth of our hearts, there is the expectation of Jesus, and the genuine authenticity of each person is found exactly in communion with Christ and not without Christ? Said in another way: If we have found the Lord and if he is the light and joy of our lives, are we sure that for someone else who has not found Christ he is not lacking something essential and that it is our duty to offer him this essential reality?

This is profound. We are Christ to each other, and we should never forget that one who has not found Him may encounter the Lord through us!

[Remole]

I agree with you regarding the clarity of B XVI's prose. It is an awkward judgment to make, to say that the present Pontiff exceeds the previous one in intellectual and verbal clarity (yes, de mortuis nil nisi bonum and all that), but it must be said. I have begun a reading (and re-reading) of his major books, and I am struck by the crystal clarity of his prose, and this from a German (if anyone has ever tried to wade through German theological prose, even in English translation, you know what endless thicket of clarifications and cul-de-sacs I am talking about). Not only his clarity, but his simple profundity has impressed me immensely, both in his written remarks (e.g., the funeral homily and the pro eligendo homily) and in his imprompu ones (e.g., the one above). Now, if only we can get Catholics to read him . . .

[Piers-the-Ploughman]

I would concur that thus far B16 is more lucid, more easily understood, by me at least. If he can make strides in cleaning up the church, limit novelties and expectations of such (Koran kissing, Buddhas on altars), and preach authentic Catholicism (no real doubt here), I would expect this to create the old fashioned ecumenism: conservative Protestants coming home, trusting that Rome will not shipwreck the faith like their own Protestant leaders have.

[HighlyOpinionated]

If we could just get Baptists and Methodists and Presbyterians and Lutherans and . . . to read anything by Pope Benedict XIV, I think they'd all stop trying to say that Catholics aren't Christians.

(Something I got stung with earlier in the week on a different web site.)

Pope Benedict XIV is just plain awesome.

[Ciexyz]

Inspiring words from the Holy Father.

[Thorin]

>>>>This guy is really GOOD, speaking off the cuff as eloquently and clearly as if he had written what he said.

Yes, Benedict is amazing. I only wish he had been born in 1937 instead of 1927.

[pieces of time]

bump for later read. Thanks.

[padfoot_lover]

I think you're right. I've been sharing B-16's writings with my non-Catholic friends; they're enjoying the reading immensely.

[Gumdrop]

Re: getting people to read Cardianl Ratzinger's books - it has become a mission for me. I have recommended it to all my relatives and some of my coworkers. Today I lent my "Salt of the Earth" to a working friend.

I am amazed at the ease of reading his books. So far I have only read "Salt of the Earth" and about 3/4 of "God and the World". Both of these were from interviews, and his though processes and clarity of the responses are breathtaking. He has a very good memory and is obviously a good listener. I think he must have a photographic memory, because he answers part of a question in detail and then proceeds to go into the other aspects of the question without stopping. Perhaps he has taken notes or something. The author/interviewer of Ratzinger, Peter Seewald, mentioned in the preface of one of the books that he was amazed too at the depth of the responses. Rarely the Cardinal would ask Seewald to excuse him while he prayed and pondered the answer before he came back to continue the interview. But apparently it did not happen often.

The interview that EWTN had of him which was from about 18 months ago, was in the English language, and even then, I thought he was very articulate and used English words that I would not normally use, so he must be super intelligent. I don't recall seeing him taking notes either.

[livius]

I agree. De mortuiis and all that - but in my opinion, BXVI is much clearer than JPII. This probably means that he's going to call down nothing but hatred from the secular powers, but frankly, I think he's ready for it, and he's also telling us to be ready for it.

[lightman]

If we could just get Baptists and Methodists and Presbyterians and Lutherans and . . . to read anything by Pope Benedict XIV, I think they'd all stop trying to say that Catholics aren't Christians.

This Lutheran has been highly impressed with Benedict XVI, even from his final moments before elevation when he thundered against the "tyranny of relativism" before the assembled College of Cardinals.

These lines from the address at the Lateran could easily have come from an evangelist like Billy Graham:

Romano Guardini correctly said 70 years ago that the essence of Christianity is not an idea but a Person. Great theologians have tried to describe the essential ideas that make up Christianity. But in the end, the Christianity that they constructed was not convincing, because Christianity is in the first place an Event, a Person. And thus in the Person we discover the richness of what is contained.

I am delighted to see the Pope teaching evangelism by example.

[ValenB4]

Thanks for the ping.

[Tantumergo]

"And, at least to me, BXVI is much clearer and to the point than JPII."

I couldn't agree with you more. It will make a major difference having a theologian rather than a philosopher at the helm. I can't wait for his first encyclical - perhaps he will return to the shorter, punchier style of some of his earlier predecessors. While JPII wrote some very profound stuff, it was largely inaccessible to the average Catholic.

[Credo_in_unum_deum]

B16: But how can one's personal authenticity be discovered if in reality, in the depth of our hearts, there is the expectation of Jesus, and the genuine authenticity of each person is found exactly in communion with Christ and not without Christ? Said in another way: If we have found the Lord and if he is the light and joy of our lives, are we sure that for someone else who has not found Christ he is not lacking something essential and that it is our duty to offer him this essential reality?

sinkspur: And, at least to me, BXVI is much clearer and to the point than JPII

Piers-the-Ploughman: I would concur that thus far B16 is more lucid, more easily understood, by me at least.

I have to say that I am somewhat mystified by this assertion. The Holy Father's statements is many things: orthodox, for instance. But "clear" and "lucid" it is not.

The defined dogma, "Outside of the Church there is no salvation," is clear and lucid.

The letter of St. John, "God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son; whoever has the Son, has the life; whoever does not have the Son, does not have the life." is clear and lucid.

St. Augustine, "No man can find salvation except in the Catholic Church. Outside the Catholic Church one can have everything except salvation. One can have honor, one can have the sacraments, one can sing alleluia, one can answer amen, one can have faith in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, and preach it too, but never can one find salvation except in the Catholic Church," is clear and lucid.

But, with all respect for Pope Benedict, his answer to his question is simply insufficient. He asks himself, "But why do we not leave them in peace? They have their authenticity, their truth. We have ours. And so, let us live together in harmony, leaving all persons as they are, so that they search out their authenticity in the best way."

The only answer to that question is, "Because they will all go to hell when they die, if we do not bring them into the One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic Church."

Are people ready for that answer? Maybe not. Maybe we need to ask people if they "are sure" that people who do not have sanctifying grace in their souls are not "missing something." But that is not clarity or lucidity. That is deliberate ambiguity to avoid causing apoplexy to simpering liberals.

Is whitewashing the Faith the right strategy? Again, maybe. I cannot say for sure. But personally, I think that the fact that the Holy Father feels the need to sugarcoat the Faith to priests even in his own diocese is pretty darn sad.