Posted on 08/05/2019 7:09:34 PM PDT by ebb tide
The forward march toward the synod for the Amazon is increasingly construed as a pitched battle with its epicenter in Germany and with very high stakes: the essence of Jesus' mission, and therefore of the Church as well.
Of German language and stock, in fact, are the leaders of both formations. On one side Cardinal Cláudio Hummes and Bishop Erwin Kräutler, the biggest promoters of the synod. On the other cardinals Gerhard Müller and Walter Brandmüller, very severe critics of how the assembly has been set up. With Pope Francis not in the middle, but solidly rooting for the former and not even deigning to acknowledge the latter.
But there is also another great German who in fact is taking sides in the conflict. His name is Joseph Ratzinger. He is keeping quiet. But what he has said and done in the past, including as pope by the name of Benedict XVI, is enough to show where he stands. Among the most radical critics.
What is, in fact, the crucial question of the battle underway? It is the primacy given by the "Instrumentum laboris," the base document of the synod, to the defense of nature and to the well-being of the Amazonian populations, with their traditions, with respect to that which in the Gospels is called “forgiveness of sins" and has in baptism its first sacrament. It is no coincidence that Bishop Kräutler has boasted, after decades of "mission" in the Amazon, saying: “I have not yet baptized an Indian, and I also will not do it.”
Ratzinger has written repeatedly on this capital question. But there is one extraordinarily simple and clear passage in the third book of his trilogy on Jesus of Nazareth, the one dedicated to the infancy narratives, published in 2012, that deserves to be presented.
There Benedict XVI takes his cue from the angel's announcement to Joseph that Mary "will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins” (Matthew 1:21), to continue as follows.
They are illuminating words, all of them to be reread with a thought for the dispute over the Amazon.
*
SALVATION YES, BUT FROM WHAT?
by Joseph Ratzinger / Benedict XVI
The divine messenger who spoke to Joseph in the dream explains the nature of this salvation: "He will save his people from their sins."
On the one hand, a lofty theological task is assigned to the child, for only God can forgive sins. So this child is immediately associated with God, directly linked with God’s holy and saving power. On the other hand, though, this definition of the Messiah’s mission could appear disappointing. The prevailing expectations of salvation were primarily focused upon Israel’s concrete sufferings–on the reestablishment of the kingdom of David, on Israel’s freedom and independence, and naturally that included material prosperity for this largely impoverished people. The promise of forgiveness of sins seems both too little and too much: too much, because it trespasses upon God’s exclusive sphere; too little, because there seems to be no thought of Israel’s concrete suffering or its true need for salvation.
So this passage already anticipates the whole debate over Jesus’ Messiahship: has he now redeemed Israel, or is everything still as it was before? Is the mission, as lived by Jesus, an answer to the promise, or not? Certainly it does not match the immediate expectations of Messianic salvation nurtured by men who felt oppressed not so much by their sins as by their sufferings, their lack of freedom, the wretched conditions of their existence.
Jesus himself poignantly raised the question as to where the priority lies in man’s need for redemption on the occasion when the four men, who could not carry the paralytic through the door because of the crowd, let him down from the roof and laid him at Jesus’ feet. The sick man’s very existence was a plea, an urgent appeal for salvation, to which Jesus responded in a way that was quite contrary to the expectation of the bearers and of the sick man himself, saying: “My son, your sins are forgiven” (Mk 2:5). This was the last thing they were concerned about. The paralytic needed to be able to walk, not to be delivered from his sins. The scribes criticized the theological presumption of Jesus’ words: the sick man and those around him were disappointed, because Jesus had apparently overlooked the man’s real need.
I consider this whole scene to be of key significance for the question of Jesus’ mission, in the terms with which it was first described in the angel’s message to Joseph. In the passage concerned, both the criticism of the scribes and the silent expectation of the onlookers is acknowledged. Jesus then demonstrates his ability to forgive sins by ordering the sick man to take up his pallet and walk away healed. At the same time, the priority of forgiveness for sins as the foundation of all true healing is clearly maintained.
Man is a relational being. And if his first, fundamental relationship is disturbed - his relationship with God - then nothing else can be truly in order. This is where the priority lies in Jesus’s message and ministry: before all else, he wants to point man toward the essence of his malady, and to show him - if you are not healed there, then however many good things you may find, you are not truly healed.
*
The book from which the selection is taken:
Joseph Ratzinger - Benedict XVI, "Jesus of Nazareth: The Infancy Narrative," Image Books, 2012.
Ping
I’d settle for hearing what Paul IV, Savonarola, or St. Jerome had to say on the subject. Jeremiah and John the Baptist would also be good for a few choice words.
Theresa of Avila and Edith Stein would be worth including on the panel as well.
Strange, St. Junipero Serra baptized many Indians in the missions he founded in California.
God made everyone. We are all created in the image of God.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.